TIP Essential When Identity Based On Belated 'Alias' Claims; Conviction Can't Rest On Improved Witness Testimonies: Supreme Court Conviction Based On Flawed Identification Cannot Be Sustained In Law: Supreme Court Acquits Sri Lankan National In UAPA Case Penalty For Misdeclaration Of Power Capacity Is Strict Liability; No Need To Prove Intent Or 'Gaming': Supreme Court Authority To Appoint Includes Power To Dismiss; Visitor Can Terminate 'First Registrar' Under Transitional Provisions: Supreme Court State Cannot Use Delay Or Contractual Clauses To Deny Statutory Compensation For Land Acquisition: Supreme Court State As Model Employer Cannot Deny Regularization Benefits To Workers Due To Its Own Clerical Lapses: Supreme Court Section 106 Evidence Act | Husband’s Failure To Explain Wife’s Unnatural Death In Matrimonial Home Completes Chain Of Circumstances: Supreme Court Tender Condition For Out-Of-State Bidders To Submit EMD Via Demand Draft Not Mandatory If Clause Uses 'May': Supreme Court Affidavit Is Not 'Evidence' Under Section 3 Of Evidence Act Unless Court Orders Its Use Under Order XIX CPC: Supreme Court Exclusion Of Natural Heirs Not A 'Suspicious Circumstance' To Invalidate Will If Testator Provides Reason: Supreme Court 18-Year-Old Rendered 100% Disabled Entitled To Compensation For Loss Of Marriage Prospects And Dignity: Punjab & Haryana HC Right To Life Under Article 21 Prioritizes Preservation Of Mother's Life Over Reproductive Autonomy If Termination Poses Fatal Risk: J&K High Court Director’s Involvement In Company Affairs A Disputed Fact; High Court Cannot Conduct ‘Mini-Trial’ To Quash Section 138 NI Act Complaint: Punjab & Haryana HC Abuse Of Process: Bombay High Court Quashes FIRs Against Lawyer & Ex-Police Chief Sanjay Pandey; Says Complaints Motivated By Vengeance Magistrate Not Bound To Order FIR In Every Case Under Section 175(3) BNSS If Complainant Possesses All Evidence: Allahabad High Court High Court Can Initiate Suo Motu Inquiry Against Judicial Officers Based On Information; Sworn Affidavit Not Mandatory: Gujarat High Court Lack Of Videography, Independent Witnesses During Contraband Seizure Relevant Factors For Granting Bail Under NDPS Act: Delhi High Court

SARFAESI Act Prevails Over MSMED Act: Kerala High Court Dismisses Challenge to Loan Recovery Proceedings

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant legal decision, the Kerala High Court reaffirmed the supremacy of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (SARFAESI Act) over the Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises Development Act (MSMED Act). The court dismissed a challenge brought by the proprietor of M/S. Alfana Cashew against loan recovery proceedings initiated by Karnataka Bank Ltd.

The court's ruling, delivered by THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K. BABU, emphasized the precedence of SARFAESI Act in matters of loan recovery and NPA classification. The petitioner, a proprietorship firm engaged in cashew processing, had availed a credit facility from the bank. Following a business downturn and loan default, the bank classified the loan account as Non-Performing Asset (NPA) on November 30, 2019, and initiated proceedings under Section 13(2) of the SARFAESI Act.

The petitioner argued that the bank should have referred the matter to the MSME Committee for a Corrective Action Plan, as per RBI guidelines. However, the court held that SARFAESI Act takes precedence over the MSMED Act, stating, ”Section 26E of the SARFAESI Act which has been inserted vide Amendment in 2016 provides that debts due to any secured creditor shall be paid in ‘priority’ over all other debts. The priority to secured creditors in payment of debt as per Section 26E of the SARFAESI Act shall prevail over the recovery mechanism of the MSMED Act.”

The court also highlighted the principle of exhausting alternative statutory remedies before resorting to Article 226 of the Constitution, stating, ”The SARFAESI Act is a complete code providing an effective remedy to any person aggrieved by the proceedings initiated under Section 13. Therefore, the SARFAESI Act is a complete code providing effective and efficacious remedy to any person aggrieved by the proceedings initiated under Section 13.”

This judgment reiterates the importance of adhering to the established legal framework in loan recovery cases and the significance of the SARFAESI Act in matters of secured creditor rights. The court’s decision has implications for similar cases across the country.

Representing the petitioner were Adv. Sri.B.J.JOHN PRAKASH, Adv. P.PRAMEL, Adv. ASHIK TOM, and Adv. RAMSEENA N. CELINE JOHN. SC SRI.JACOB GEORGE and Adv. K.P.SUJESH KUMAR represented Karnataka Bank Ltd.

Date of Decision: 31 OCTOBER 2023

NAZIR,PROPRIETOR OF M/S. ALFANA CASHEW VS KARNATAKA BANK LTD.

[gview file="https://lawyerenews.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/31-Oct-2023-Nazir-Vs-Karnatka-Bank-Ltd.pdf"]

Latest Legal News