Supreme Court of India Judgements

37260 Judgements hosted as on16/06/2026 - Search (FREE), Subscribe, Read & Download

Category: SARFAESI

SARFAESI

Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 — Auction Sale — Compliance with Rule 9 — Mandatory Nature — Payment of Balance 75% Beyond 15-Day Period — No Written Agreement for Extension — Sale Set Aside — Article 142 — Redemption Opportunity Granted to Legal Heirs of Deceased Guarantor.

Jun 12, 2026 sclaw

2026 INSC 633 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH M. R. VASUMATHI Vs. THE AUTHORIZED OFFICER AND OTHERS ( Before : Dipankar Datta and Augustine George Masih, JJ. ) Civil…

SARFAESI

Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (SARFAESI Act), Section 13 — Default in repayment of financial assistance — Secured creditor entitled to take possession and auction secured asset (School premises) — Petitioners repeatedly failed to honour commitments and undertakings to repay debt, even after High Court and Supreme Court orders — Conduct amounted to disobedience of court orders and disregard for rule of law.

Apr 28, 2026 sclaw

2026 INSC 408 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH CHAITANYA BAHUUDDESHIYA SHIKSHAN PRASARAK MANDAL AND OTHERS Vs. AUXILO FINSERVE PVT. LTD. AND OTHERS ( Before : Dipankar Datta and Satish…

SARFAESI

Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (SARFAESI Act, 2002) — Applicability in Nagaland — Constitutional Mandate — Article 371A of the Constitution of India — Special provision with respect to the State of Nagaland — Article 371A(1)(a)(iv) stipulates that no Act of Parliament concerning ownership and transfer of land and its resources shall apply to Nagaland unless the Legislative Assembly resolves so — SARFAESI Act, which envisages transfer of property by auction sale for realizing secured assets, relates to ‘ownership and transfer of land’ — Provisions of SARFAESI Act became applicable in Nagaland only from the date of the Governor’s notification (December 10, 2021) — Action initiated by the Appellant-Corporation under Section 13(2) of SARFAESI Act in 2011 was without jurisdiction as the Act was not applicable in Nagaland at that time. (Paras 15, 18, 19, 20, 21, 28)

Dec 17, 2025 sclaw

2025 INSC 1446 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH NORTH EASTERN DEVELOPMENT FINANCE CORPORATION LTD. (NEDFI) Vs. M/S L. DOULO BUILDERS AND SUPPLIERS CO. PVT. LTD. ( Before : Dipankar…

SARFAESI

Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (SARFAESI Act) — Priority of Debts — Section 26E — When two enactments contain non-obstante clauses, the provision incorporated later in time prevails; however, if one enactment creates a statutory ‘first charge’, that charge prevails over the general ‘priority’ conferred by the later non-obstante clause — SARFAESI Act, Section 26E, conferring priority to secured creditors’ debts registered with the Central Registry, does not override the statutory ‘first charge’ created for Provident Fund dues under the Employees’ Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952.

Nov 23, 2025 sclaw

2025 INSC 1335 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH JALGAON DISTRICT CENTRAL COOP. BANK LTD. Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS ( Before : B. R. Gavai, CJI. and K.…

SARFAESI

Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (SARFAESI Act) — Priority of Debts — Section 26E — When two enactments contain non-obstante clauses, the provision incorporated later in time prevails; however, if one enactment creates a statutory ‘first charge’, that charge prevails over the general ‘priority’ conferred by the later non-obstante clause — SARFAESI Act, Section 26E, conferring priority to secured creditors’ debts registered with the Central Registry, does not override the statutory ‘first charge’ created for Provident Fund dues under the Employees’ Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952.

Nov 22, 2025 sclaw

2025 INSC 1335 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH JALGAON DISTRICT CENTRAL COOP. BANK LTD. Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS ( Before : B. R. Gavai, CJI. and K.…

SARFAESI

Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993 (DRT Act) — Income Tax Act, 1961 — Application of Second and Third Schedules to Income Tax Act and Income Tax (Certificate Proceedings) Rules, 1962 for immovable property sales — Rule 53 of Second Schedule requires proclamation of sale to contain Material information for the purchaser, including any encumbrances or claims affecting the property’s value.

Oct 5, 2025 sclaw

2025 INSC 1161 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY Vs. CORPORATION BANK AND OTHERS ( Before : Sanjay Kumar and Alok Aradhe, JJ. ) Civil Appeal No.…

SARFAESI

Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 – Sections 13(4) and 17 – The Court emphasized that the High Court should not entertain petitions under Article 226 when an effective alternative remedy is available, especially in financial recovery matters – The Court reiterated the principle that confirmed auction sales can only be interfered with in cases of fraud or collusion, which were not present in this case – The Supreme Court concluded that the High Court had erred in its decision, and the rights of the auction purchaser should be upheld following the confirmed sale and registration of the property – Appeal Allowed.

Apr 14, 2024 sclaw

2024 INSC 297 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH PHR INVENT EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY — Appellant Vs. UCO BANK AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : B.R. Gavai and Rajesh Bindal…

SARFAESI

Security Interest (Enforcement) Rules, 2002 – Rule 9(5) – Contract Act, 1872 – Sections 73 and 74 – Forfeiture of earnest-money deposit by the secured creditor – Constitutional validity of Rule 9(5) of the SARFAESI Rules is upheld – Any dilution of the forfeiture provided under Rule 9(5) of the SARFAESI Rules would result in the entire auction process under the SARFAESI Act being set at naught by mischievous auction purchaser(s) through sham bids, thereby undermining the overall object of the SARFAESI Act of promoting financial stability, reducing NPAs and fostering a more efficient and streamlined mechanism for recovery of bad debts

Feb 6, 2024 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH THE AUTHORISED OFFICER, CENTRAL BANK OF INDIA — Appellant Vs. SHANMUGAVELU — Respondent ( Before : Dr. Dhananjaya Y. Chandrachud, CJI., J.B. Pardiwala and…

Banking Property Matters SARFAESI

(SARFAESI) – Section 13(8) – Transfer of Property Act, 1882 – Section 60 – Redemption of mortgage – Failure on the part of the borrower in tendering the entire dues including the charges, interest, costs etc. before the publication of the auction notice as required by Section 13(8) of the SARFAESI Act, would also sufficiently constitute extinguishment of right of redemption of mortgage

Oct 1, 2023 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH CELIR LLP — Appellant Vs. BAFNA MOTORS (MUMBAI) PVT. LTD. AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Dr. Dhananjaya Y. Chandrachud, CJI. and J.B.…

You missed

Service

Constitution of India, 1950 — Art. 16 and 226 — Public Employment — Direct Recruitment — Eligibility Criteria — Workshop Experience — Pendency of workshop renewal applications — Effect on candidates — Where a recruitment notification mandates a minimum of one year of experience in a Government-approved workshop, candidates cannot be prejudiced or disqualified merely because the workshop’s application for renewal of approval was pending with the State authorities during the period they gained experience — Depriving an otherwise eligible candidate of employment due to an administrative “period of eclipse” or delay on the part of state machinery is arbitrary and discriminatory–Ashok Kumar Yadav v. State of Haryana, 1985 INSC 137, relied on; State of Uttar Pradesh v. Atul Kumar Dwivedi, 2022 INSC 24, Distinguished.

Jun 16, 2026 sclaw
RTI

Right to Information Act, 2005 — S. 24(4) — Madhya Pradesh Special Police Establishment Act, 1947 — S. 2(1), S. 3 — “Intelligence and Security Organisation” — Scope and Applicability of Exemption — Jurisdiction of Special Police Establishment (SPE) — The expression “intelligence and security organisations” under Section 24 of the RTI Act implies that the concerned entity must be statutory or institutionally empowered to handle matters of intelligence and national/state security — The Special Police Establishment (SPE) of Madhya Pradesh, established under Section 2(1) of the Act of 1947, is clothed with a limited jurisdiction restricted strictly to investigating offences punishable under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, and select economic/fraud offenses under Sections 409, 420, and Chapter XVIII of the Indian Penal Code — Because neither the Lokayukt nor the SPE handles matters connected to general ‘intelligence’ and ‘security’, the SPE cannot be deemed an “intelligence and security organisation” under Section 24(4) of the RTI Act — Principle of institutional parity cannot be invoked to grant blanket exemptions to a anti-corruption investigation agency.

Jun 16, 2026 sclaw
C P C

Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) — Section 11, Explanation IV — Constructive Res Judicata — Application of the principle depends on the facts and circumstances of each case, considering the ambit of earlier proceedings and the nexus of the matter to the controversy — It is founded on public policy to prevent multiplicity of proceedings and avoid parties being vexed twice over for the same litigation — Parties are expected to exercise reasonable diligence and bring forward every point that properly belonged to the subject of litigation and which they might and ought to have brought forward — Negligence, inadvertence, or accident in omitting a part of the case does not exempt from its application.

Jun 16, 2026 sclaw
Accident

Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 — Section 165 and 166 — Liability for injuries sustained due to falling tree branch — Injuries caused by falling tree branch while vehicle was stationary under the tree during rain — Held, not an accident “arising out of the use of a motor vehicle” as the motor vehicle did not play an active role. [

Jun 16, 2026 sclaw