Trademark Pirates Face Legal Wrath: Delhi HC Enforces Radio Mirchi’s IP Rights Swiftly Madras High Court Upholds Extended Adjudication Period Under Customs Act Amid Allegations of Systemic Lapses Disputes Over Religious Office Will Be Consolidated for Efficient Adjudication, Holds Karnataka High Court Motive Alone, Without Corroborative Evidence, Insufficient for Conviction : High Court Acquits Accused in 1993 Murder Case Himachal Pradesh HC Criticizes State for Delays: Orders Timely Action on Employee Grievances Calls for Pragmatic Approach to Desertion and Cruelty in Divorce Cases: Calcutta High Court Orders Fresh Trial Juvenile Tried as Adult: Bombay High Court Validates JJB Decision, Modifies Sentence to 7 Years Retrospective Application of Amended Rules for Redeployment Declared Invalid: Orissa High Court NDPS Act Leaves No Room for Leniency: HC Requires Substantial Proof of Innocence for Bail No Protection Without Performance: MP High Court Denies Relief Under Section 53A of Transfer of Property Act Delays in processing applications for premature release cannot deprive convicts of interim relief: Karnataka High Court Grants 90-Day Parole Listing All Appeals Arising From A Common Judgment Before The Same Bench Avoids Contradictory Rulings: Full Bench of the Patna High Court. Age Claims in Borderline Cases Demand Scrutiny: Madhya Pradesh HC on Juvenile Justice Act Bishop Garden Not Available for Partition Due to Legal Quietus on Declaration Suit: Madras High Court Exclusion of Certain Heirs Alone Does Not Make a Will Suspicious: Kerala High Court Upholds Validity of Will Proof of Delivery Was Never Requested, Nor Was it a Payment Precondition: Delhi High Court Held Courier Firm Entitled to Payment Despite Non-Delivery Allegations Widowed Daughter Eligible for Compassionate Appointment under BSNL Scheme: Allahabad High Court Brutality of an Offence Does Not Dispense With Legal Proof: Supreme Court Overturns Life Imprisonment of Two Accused Marumakkathayam Law | Partition Is An Act By Which The Nature Of The Property Is Changed, Reflecting An Alteration In Ownership: Supreme Court Motor Accident Claim | Compensation Must Aim To Restore, As Far As Possible, What Has Been Irretrievably Lost: Supreme Court Awards Rs. 1.02 Crore Personal Criticism Of Judges Or Recording Findings On Their Conduct In Judgments Must Be Avoided: Supreme Court Efficiency In Arbitral Proceedings Is Integral To Effective Dispute Resolution. Courts Must Ensure That Arbitral Processes Reach Their Logical End: Supreme Court Onus Lies On The Propounder To Remove All Suspicious Circumstances Surrounding A Will To The Satisfaction Of The Court: Calcutta High Court Deeds of Gift Not Governed by Section 22-B of Registration Act: Andhra Pradesh High Court Testimony Of  Injured Witness Carries A Built-In Guarantee Of Truthfulness: Himachal Pradesh High Court Upholds Conviction for Attempted Murder POCSO | Conviction Cannot Be Sustained Without Conclusive Proof Of Minority - Burden Lies On The Prosecution: Telangana High Court Credible Eyewitness Account, Supported By Forensic Corroboration, Creates An Unassailable Chain Of Proof That Withstands Scrutiny: Punjab and Haryana High Court Jammu & Kashmir High Court Grants Bail to Schizophrenic Mother Accused of Murdering Infant Son

SARFAESI Act Takes Precedence: Karnataka High Court Orders Registration of Sale Certificate Despite Pending Tax Dues

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a landmark decision, the Karnataka High Court has ordered the mandatory registration of a sale certificate issued by a bank under the SARFAESI Act, despite pending Income Tax dues against the original property owners. Justice M. Nagaprasanna delivered the judgment, underscoring the precedence of the SARFAESI Act over other statutory dues and directing the State Government to ensure compliance through circulars to Sub-Registrars.

Background: The petitioner, Sri T. Bharathgowda, acquired a property through a public auction conducted by Canara Bank under the SARFAESI Act after the original owners defaulted on their loan. Despite fulfilling all requirements for registration, the Sub-Registrar refused to register the sale certificate, citing pending Income Tax dues against the original owners. The petitioner sought a writ of mandamus to compel the Sub-Registrar to complete the registration.

Court Observations and Views:

Credibility of SARFAESI Act Provisions: The court highlighted the paramount importance of the SARFAESI Act in cases involving the recovery of financial assets by secured creditors. Justice Nagaprasanna noted, “Section 26E of the SARFAESI Act mandates priority to secured creditors over all other debts and all revenues, taxes, cesses, and other rates payable to the Central Government or State Government or local authority.”

Priority Over Government Dues: Reaffirming the SARFAESI Act’s priority provisions, the court referenced several Supreme Court rulings, including Punjab National Bank v. Union of India and Dena Bank v. Bhikhabhai Prabhudas Parekh & Co. These cases established that secured creditors’ rights take precedence over government claims, including taxes. “The dues owed to the Crown or the State cannot take away the right of a secured creditor in the light of Section 26E and Section 35 of the SARFAESI Act,” the judgment read.

The court delved into the statutory framework governing the registration of documents under the Registration Act, 1908, and the Karnataka Registration Rules, 1965. Justice Nagaprasanna pointed out that the reasons for refusal to register a document are clearly enumerated in Rule 171 of the Karnataka Registration Rules, none of which applied to the case at hand. “The Sub-Registrar can act only within the four corners of the Registration Act and the Registration Rules framed by the State,” he observed, underscoring that the Sub-Registrar’s refusal was beyond the statutory grounds provided.

Justice Nagaprasanna stated, “The Sub-Registrar has no jurisdiction to refuse registration of a document when all the necessary requirements for registration have been met. The denial of registration citing pending Income Tax dues is not supported by any statutory provision.”

Decision: The Karnataka High Court’s directive reinforces the supremacy of the SARFAESI Act over other statutory claims, ensuring that the rights of secured creditors are upheld. By mandating the registration of the sale certificate and directing the State Government to issue compliance circulars, the judgment aims to prevent future undue refusals and streamline the registration process. This landmark decision is expected to have a profound impact on property registration practices, particularly in cases involving financial recoveries under the SARFAESI Act.

Date of Decision: 28th May 2024

Sri T. Bharathgowda vs. State of Karnataka & Others

Similar News