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

Tribunal Must Be Alive to the Contentions Raised in the Securitisation Application” – Kerala High Court Dismisses Challenge Against DRT’s SARFAESI Act Decisions

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


The Kerala High Court, under the judgment of Justice K. Babu, has dismissed a petition contesting the Debt Recovery Tribunal-I, Ernakulam’s orders regarding the enforcement of security interest under the SARFAESI Act against M/S JIS International Exports Pvt. Ltd. This decision came after allegations of substantial loan defaults by the petitioner.

The core legal discussion centered on the challenge to the enforcement actions under the SARFAESI Act, scrutinizing both the jurisdiction of the Debt Recovery Tribunal (DRT) and its adherence to procedural and statutory requirements.

The petitioners, M/S JIS International Exports Pvt. Ltd., faced actions under the SARFAESI Act initiated by Indian Overseas Bank due to alleged failures to repay loans totaling approximately Rs. 1430 Lakhs. The petition raised questions about the procedural correctness and jurisdictional authority of the DRT’s orders.

Jurisdiction and Adherence to Procedure: The High Court confirmed that the DRT had appropriately exercised its jurisdiction and followed the procedures as prescribed under the SARFAESI Act, aligning with previous High Court directives.

Analysis under SARFAESI Act: It was determined that the DRT correctly applied legal provisions, particularly regarding the enforcement of security interests, and that the procedural challenges raised by the petitioners were without merit.

Compliance with Mandatory Requirements: The Tribunal’s actions in granting physical possession of secured assets were upheld, with findings that statutory requirements under the SARFAESI Act were met.

Interim Relief Principles: The Court emphasized the Tribunal’s duty to consider the merits of the case based on the principles of interim relief, including a strong prima facie case, balance of convenience, and prevention of irreparable injury. The Tribunal was found to have properly considered these aspects in its deliberations.

Decision The petition was dismissed, affirming the DRT’s decisions under the SARFAESI Act. This judgment underlines the adequacy of the statutory frameworks within the SARFAESI Act for redressal and enforcement of security interests.

 Date of Decision: April 19, 2024

M/S JIS International Exports Pvt. Ltd. And Others v. Debt Recovery Tribunal-1 Ernakulam, Indian Overseas Bank, and Others

Latest Legal News