#sale certificate

The Delhi High Court held that a SARFAESI auction sale becomes final upon full payment within the Rule 9(4) period, extinguishing the borrower's redemption right irrespective of pending sale certificate registration before the DRT. The ruling secures auction purchasers' rights and clarifies that procedural delays in registration cannot reopen redemption.

Allahabad High Court clarifies that the 45-day limitation period under Section 17 of the SARFAESI Act begins from the issuance of the sale certificate, not the auction date. This ruling sets aside orders by the Debts Recovery Tribunal and Appellate Tribunal, remanding the case for fresh consideration on merits, impacting borrowers and secured creditors in debt recovery proceedings.

The Jharkhand High Court has ruled that the Chairperson of the Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal lacks judicial authority under Section 17A to stay the issuance of a sale certificate under SARFAESI Act. Only the Appellate Tribunal itself, after compliance with the mandatory pre-deposit requirement under Section 17(2), may grant such relief - reinforcing the separation between administrative and judicial functions in debt recovery proceedings and safeguarding secured creditors' enforcement rights.

The Kerala High Court has ruled that a sale certificate issued under the SARFAESI Act does not attract stamp duty when issued, as it merely evidences title already transferred by auction confirmation. Stamp duty is payable only when the certificate is presented for registration, relieving auction purchasers of premature financial burdens and aligning procedural compliance with substantive rights.

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.

MP High Court holds banks accountable for auction deposits when sale certificates are delayed due to DRT inaction, ordering a full refund with 6% interest. The ruling reinforces auction purchaser rights under the SARFAESI Act and sets a precedent for bank liability in procedural failures.