MACT | A Minor Cannot Be Treated as a Non-Earner: Punjab & Haryana High Court Consensual Love Affair Not Cheating Under IPC Section 417: Madras High Court Acquits Man Despite Paternity Confirmation Review Jurisdiction is an Ant-Hole in a Pigeon-Hol: Madras High Court Dismisses Review Plea Against Order Upholding Arbitral Award on Liquidated Damages Bank Can Freeze Guarantor’s Salary Account to Recover Loan Dues: Kerala High Court Clarifies CPC Exemption Does Not Apply to Banker’s Right Revenue Entry Calling Property ‘Ancestral’ Does Not Create Title: Gujarat High Court Upholds Registered Will in Second Appeal Licensee Cannot Resist Resumption Of Railway Land: Gauhati High Court Upholds Eviction For Amrit Bharat Station Scheme Mere Non-Payment of Business Dues Is Not Cheating: Calcutta High Court Protects Traders from Criminal Prosecution in Purely Civil Dispute Prosecution’s Failure to Prove Age of Prosecutrix Beyond Reasonable Doubt Fatal to POCSO Conviction: Rajasthan High Court No Title, No Right, No Equity: Bombay High Court Demolishes Claim Over Footpath Stall, Imposes ₹5 Lakh Costs for Abuse of Process Section 155(2) Cr.P.C. Does Not Bar Complainant From Seeking Magistrate’s Permission: Allahabad High Court Clarifies Law on Non-Cognizable Investigations Un-Retracted Section 108 Statement Is Binding: Delhi High Court Declines to Reopen ₹3.5 Crore Cigarette Smuggling Valuation Section 34 Is Not an Appeal in Disguise: Delhi High Court Upholds 484-Day Extension in IRCON–Afcons Tunnel Arbitration Section 432(2) Cannot Be Rendered Fatuous: Calcutta High Court Reasserts Balance Between Judicial Opinion and Executive Discretion in Remission Matters Termination of Mandate Is Not Termination of Arbitration: Bombay High Court Revives Reference and Appoints Substitute Arbitrator CBI Can’t Prosecute When Bank Suffers No Loss: Andhra Pradesh High Court Discharges Bhimavaram Hospitals Directors in ₹1.5 Crore SBI Case Section 256 CrPC Cannot Be A Shield For An Accused Who Never Faced Trial: Allahabad High Court Restores 8 Cheque Bounce Complaints

Rents Payable to A Creditor By A Debtor Are Considered Assignable Claims: Supreme Court

05 September 2024 5:44 AM

By: Admin


In a groundbreaking legal ruling, the Supreme Court has confirmed that rents payable to a creditor by a debtor are considered "assignable claims." The verdict, delivered on October 19, 2023, settles a significant legal debate and has far-reaching implications for financial transactions involving debts and contractual rights.

The case in question, IL&FS vs. HDFC Bank, centered around the transfer of rents by IL&FS, a borrower, to HDFC Bank, the lender. The dispute arose when IL&FS argued that the transfer of rents was not a legitimate assignment but rather a pledge. The Supreme Court's judgment has unequivocally established that such transfers of debts are assignable claims under the Transfer of Property Act, 1882.

The Court's observations during the judgment are instructive and emphasize the legality of the assignment. In the words of the Court, "An actionable claim would include a right to recover insurance money or a partner's right to sue for an account of a dissolved partnership or the right to claim the benefit of a contract not coupled with any liability."

Furthermore, the Court stressed, "The assignment of a debt will not be contrary to public policy solely on the grounds that the assignee has purchased the debt for a considerably discounted price or because that price is only payable after a period of credit. Nor will the assignment be contrary to public policy simply because the assignee may make a profit on the transaction at the end of the day."

This landmark judgment clarifies the distinction between pledges and assignments, solidifying the legal standing of debt assignments. It reinforces the practice of assigning debts and rights in financial transactions and has significant implications for creditors, debtors, and the financial industry as a whole.

The ruling reaffirms the principle that the substance of a transaction matters more than its form and that the nature and substance of the documents determine their legal implications. This decision is expected to have a profound impact on future financial agreements and will likely lead to greater clarity and certainty in such transactions.

Legal experts have hailed the judgment as a milestone in contract interpretation and property law, providing much-needed clarity on the assignment of claims and the transfer of debts. It is expected to guide future legal proceedings and set a precedent for similar cases, promoting transparency and efficiency in financial dealings.

Date of Decision: 19 October 2023

INFRASTRUCTURE LEASING AND FINANCIAL SERVICES LTD.   vs HDFC BANK LTD. & ANR.

Latest Legal News