#security interest

Under SARFAESI Act Section 14, a District Magistrate may only verify mortgage validity and statutory compliance; it cannot decide borrower objections. This ruling clarifies DM limits, protects banks' enforcement rights, and defines the scope of secured asset proceedings.

The Kerala High Court holds that where the Debt Recovery Tribunal has not yet determined the exact debt amount, the pre-deposit required to file an appeal under Section 18 of the SARFAESI Act must be based on the secured creditor’s claimed amount, not an arbitrary or lower figure. This ensures creditors cannot be unfairly delayed in enforcement while protecting borrowers from speculative deposits, setting a clear benchmark for appellate compliance across Indian banks and financial institutions.

Kerala High Court allows borrowers to regularize loan accounts by repaying Rs. 1,90,414 in installments while continuing EMIs, staying SARFAESI enforcement. The ruling mandates strict compliance timelines, balancing borrower relief with creditor interests under proportionality principles.

Chhattisgarh High Court rules that District Magistrates must decide SARFAESI Act Section 14 applications within 60 days, failing which any extension without written reasons is invalid. The judgment underscores strict compliance with statutory timelines, impacting secured creditors and borrowers in enforcement proceedings.

Bombay High Court holds that prior registered security interest under SARFAESI Act overrides GST recovery notices, affirming priority of secured creditors.