Finance : The paper shows that loan fraud persists due to enforcement failures, not lack of legal provisions. It highlights delays in detect...
Corporate Law : The Court held that insolvency proceedings cannot be invoked after completion of SARFAESI auction to stall recovery. It clarified ...
Corporate Law : Learn the critical protections available to borrowers facing recovery actions, including notice, appeal, and redemption rights, to...
Corporate Law : Learn how secured creditors can relinquish or realize their security interest during liquidation under IBC, including timelines an...
Corporate Law : Explore how the SARFAESI Act transformed banking practices, enhancing recovery processes while raising concerns about borrowers' r...
Corporate Law : Ministry of Finance addresses Lok Sabha questions on misuse of SARFAESI Act, detailing existing safeguards for borrowers and regul...
Finance : There is no mention of the term re-sealing of property in SARFAESI Act, 2022 and the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy (RDB) Act, 1...
Corporate Law : The Central Govt has initiated formulation of laws to secure prudential banking & help effect a culture of credit discipline i...
Fema / RBI : The Gross Advances of Scheduled Commercial Banks (SCBs) increased from Rs.25,03,431 crore as on 31.3.2008 to Rs. 68,75,748 crore...
Fema / RBI : It is widely felt that the spectre of high-value economic offenders absconding from India to defy the legal process seriously unde...
Income Tax : The ITAT Mumbai ruled that income earned by a securitisation trust created under the SARFAESI Act was taxable in the hands of Secu...
Corporate Law : The Court held that disputed issues and ongoing statutory proceedings cannot be challenged through a writ petition. It emphasized ...
Corporate Law : The High Court held that DRT orders are appealable under Section 18 of the SARFAESI Act. It ruled that writ jurisdiction cannot be...
Corporate Law : The Tribunal admitted the voluntary insolvency application after examining financial statements, bank records, and other documents...
Corporate Law : The tribunal relied on Supreme Court precedent to hold that a second proceeding cannot be filed when an earlier challenge has been...
CA, CS, CMA : CA. Ravish Maniyar found guilty of professional misconduct by ICAI for failing to disclose pending SARFAESI proceedings in an audi...
Fema / RBI : Reserve Bank of India (RBI) has issued Circular RBI/2023-24/63 on September 25, 2023, addressing the display of information relate...
Finance : Central Government hereby specifies such housing financial companies registered under sub-section (5) of section 29A of the Nation...
Corporate Law : Government notifies Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest (Central Registry) ...
Fema / RBI : Sale notice for sale of movable properties- E-Auction Sale Notice for Sale of Movable Assets under the Securitisation and Reconstr...
The ITAT Mumbai ruled that income earned by a securitisation trust created under the SARFAESI Act was taxable in the hands of Security Receipt holders because the trust qualified as a revocable trust under Sections 61 to 63 of the Income Tax Act.
The Court held that disputed issues and ongoing statutory proceedings cannot be challenged through a writ petition. It emphasized that proper remedies must be pursued before competent forums.
The paper shows that loan fraud persists due to enforcement failures, not lack of legal provisions. It highlights delays in detection, weak forensic systems, and fragmented supervision as key issues.
The Court held that insolvency proceedings cannot be invoked after completion of SARFAESI auction to stall recovery. It clarified that Section 96 moratorium cannot undo concluded transactions.
The High Court held that DRT orders are appealable under Section 18 of the SARFAESI Act. It ruled that writ jurisdiction cannot be invoked without exhausting the statutory remedy.
The Tribunal admitted the voluntary insolvency application after examining financial statements, bank records, and other documents showing continuing default. It held that the application was complete and complied with Section 10 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code.
The tribunal relied on Supreme Court precedent to hold that a second proceeding cannot be filed when an earlier challenge has been withdrawn without permission to pursue another remedy.
The court held that civil courts retain jurisdiction in partition disputes involving property under SARFAESI proceedings because the Debts Recovery Tribunal cannot grant partition relief.
The Tribunal ruled that a sale made after creation of an equitable mortgage cannot defeat the bank’s security interest, leading to dismissal of the borrower’s challenge.
The Tribunal ruled that the bank followed Rule 8 of the SIE Rules by publishing the sale notice in two newspapers and serving it on the borrower. The auction conducted under SARFAESI was upheld.
