Illegal NPA Classification For MSME Borrower Vitiates SARFAESI Proceedings: DRT Chandigarh

The Debts Recovery Tribunal at Chandigarh has held that proceedings under the SARFAESI Act cannot be sustained where the loan account was classified as a Non-Performing Asset without following the mandatory procedure applicable to MSME borrowers, rendering the NPA declaration illegal. The tribunal held that once the classification itself is contrary to law, all subsequent enforcement measures taken under the Act are liable to be quashed. Presiding Officer Mridulesh Kumar Singh made the...

Agricultural Officer Certificate Not Enough To Claim SARFAESI Exemption For Agricultural Land: DRT Ernakulam

The Debts Recovery Tribunal at Ernakulam has recently held that a certificate issued by an Agricultural Officer is not sufficient by itself to prove that a secured property is agricultural land exempt from recovery under the SARFAESI Act, reiterating that the burden lies on the borrower to establish the nature of the land at the time the loan was availed.Presiding Officer Sovan Kumar Dash dismissed a securitization application filed by borrowers challenging recovery proceedings initiated by...

SARFAESI Notice To Dead Guarantor Was Invalid Even If Received By Borrower's Wife: DRT Ernakulam

The Debt Recovery Tribunal (DRT) in Kerala has set aside recovery proceedings initiated by South Indian Bank Ltd. under the SARFAESI Act after finding that one of the demand notices had been issued to a guarantor who had died several years earlier. Presiding Officer Sovan Kumar Dash, while partly allowing a securitization application filed by borrower Shijo Jose, observed that a demand notice issued to a deceased person is void from the outset and cannot be validated merely because it was...

SARFAESI Act | Correcting Wrong Date In District Magistrate's Section 14 Order Is Not Review: Allahabad High Court

The Allahabad High Court has upheld a District Magistrate's decision to correct a wrong date in a SARFAESI order passed to assist a bank in taking possession of mortgaged property, holding that fixing a typographical error does not amount to an impermissible review. Justice Subhash Vidyarthi held that the District Magistrate under Section 14 of the Act performs an administrative role while passing such orders and does not exercise judicial power. Because of this, the magistrate is permitted to...