#attachment of property

The Karnataka High Court ruled that an 18-year delay in seeking attachment of property under Order 21 Rule 54 CPC disentitles the decree holder to relief, particularly when the judgment debtor's properties were transferred out of their name. The ruling underscores the decree holder's duty to act promptly in execution proceedings to avoid forfeiture of claims.

The Bombay High Court has ruled that Section 32A of the IBC wipes out pre-CIRP attachments made under the MPID Act when a corporate debtor was never named as an accused, affirming the clean slate principle even for properties attached before insolvency. This shields resolution applicants from legacy liabilities, reinforcing the IBC’s intent to restore operational viability without collateral legal entanglements.

The Bombay High Court has ruled that a secured creditor’s rights under the SARFAESI Act, including possession orders under Section 14, take precedence over conflicting arbitration awards and judicial attachments - even when the debtor is a decree holder. This clarifies that equitable mortgage registration and CERSAI compliance empower banks to bypass civil litigation outcomes, reshaping asset recovery strategies across financial institutions.

The Punjab & Haryana High Court ruled that pre-judgment attachment of property under Order XXXVIII Rule 5 CPC must be proportionate to the claimed amount, setting aside an order attaching ₹1.1 crore worth of land for a ₹24.17 lakh suit. The decision reinforces that courts must ensure attachments do not exceed the financial stakes of the dispute, protecting defendants from disproportionate asset seizures.

Madras High Court rules that registering authorities cannot refuse registration of a sale certificate issued under SARFAESI Act merely due to existing attachments. The court directed compliance within two weeks, reinforcing that attachments hold no significance against SARFAESI-issued certificates, as per settled law and circulars.

Bombay High Court reaffirms that objections to property attachment under Order XXI Rule 58 CPC cannot be re-agitated once finally adjudicated, applying res judicata in execution proceedings. The ruling bars belated claims where parties fail to lead evidence during initial adjudication, reinforcing finality in civil execution disputes.