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 tribunal ruled that buying property through a court-supervised auction does not shield a transaction from benami law. Where the lender’s creditworthiness and real source of funds are unproven, provisional attachment is valid.
The SAFEMA Appellate Tribunal held that property attachment under PMLA requires prima facie proof of a money trail. Mere suspicion or association with accused persons is insufficient to sustain attachment.
The Tribunal held that holding and operating a foreign bank account without RBI approval is a continuing contravention under FEMA. Subsequent repatriation or tax disclosure does not wipe out liability, and penalties were upheld.
The Tribunal held that the SARFAESI notice constituted a valid invocation of the guarantee and admitted the insolvency process. It ruled that the arbitral award refreshed limitation and objections on maintainability could not stand.
The Tribunal ruled that a car financed partly through unexplained cash could be attached under PMLA, even though a bank held a secured interest, reinforcing that tainted funds justify attachment.
The Tribunal found that statutory procedures for issuing demand, possession, and sale notices were properly followed by the bank. It observed that the borrowers provided no valuation report or evidence supporting their claim of undervaluation. The auction was therefore sustained as legally valid.
The Tribunal confirmed the dismissal of an SA challenging symbolic possession under SARFAESI. Notices were sent to the guarantor, borrower, and spouse, with proper affixture and newspaper publication. The case emphasizes the importance of timely communication and procedural compliance in recovery proceedings.
The High Court directed the lower court to decide the pending Section 14 SARFAESI application within two months. The ruling emphasizes timely adjudication without touching the merits.
The High Court refused to entertain the challenge to a sale notice, holding that the petitioner must pursue the statutory remedy under Section 17 of the SARFAESI Act. The ruling reiterates that writ jurisdiction cannot be invoked when an effective alternative remedy exists.
The Court dismissed the petition after holding that statutory remedies under Section 17 of the SARFAESI Act must be exhausted first. It allowed the petitioners to approach the DRT for their grievances.
