TOP LEGAL DEVELOPMENTS THIS WEEK [18-24 May, 2026] | Stray Dogs; Non-Veg Food in Ganga; Katy Perry Trade Mark; and more
A quick roundup to cover all the important legal developments and cases this week.
secured creditor
Transfer of assets does not equal transfer of business; Liability arises only if entire business is acquired as a unit: Bombay High Court
“Purchase in case of assets of dormant business, auction purchaser is not liable to discharge liability arising out of business of erstwhile owner.”
‘Can’t allow borrowers to wiggle out of liability by using tenancy mechanism’; Allahabad HC directs grant of secured asset’s possession to Axis Bank
“Once an order has been passed under Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act, the authorities are required to act in pursuance of the same and as per the provisions of the Act. The mechanism used by the borrowers to wiggle out of their liability cannot be countenanced by us.”
NCLAT rules on Secured Creditor’s right to choose method of debt realisation
NCLAT stated that since the IBC overrides the SARFAESI Act, the Liquidator ought not to prefer a petition, based on the SARFAESI Act, and therefore Liquidator’s decision to classify the appellant as an unsecured financial creditor was illegal and invalid.
No bar in law for a secured creditor to directly proceed u/s 14 of SARFAESI Act after withdrawing measures taken u/s 13(4): Delhi High Court
“The scope of writ jurisdiction cannot be allowed to trounce the statutory obligation, on the stratagem of efficacious alternate remedy.”
Operational Creditors must be paid equivalent amount as per Section 53 of the IBC in case of liquidation of Corporate Debtor: SC
The Court said that Vistra ITCL (India) Ltd. would be treated as a secured creditor in terms of Section 52 and 53 of the IBC, and would be entitled to retain the security interest in the pledged shares.
![Landmark Judgments on Banking Laws [2022] Part I](https://blog-images.scconline.com/blobblogscconl28830c17bf/blog/wp-content/uploads/2023/03/MicrosoftTeams-image-3-1-440x293.png)
Landmark Judgments on Banking Laws [2022] Part I
by Siddharth R. Gupta†
Cite as: 2023 SCC OnLine Blog Exp 30
Only a secured property used as agricultural land can be exempted under SARFAESI Act; Supreme Court sets aside Telangana High Court’s order
Supreme Court opined that instead of shifting the burden of proof on the secured creditor to prove that the secured property was not agricultural property, the Telangana High Court should have laid down the burden of proof on the borrowers.
IBC’s Section 53 does not over-ride Section 48 of GVAT Act; Adjudicating Authority may reject Resolution Plan if it ignores statutory dues payable to State/Legal authority: SC
Supreme Court: The bench of Indira Banerjee* and AS Bopanna, JJ has reversed the NCLAT order wherein it was held that the
Whether confiscation by Custom & Excise Authority forfeits the claim of Secured Creditor over such property? Whether the dues of Excise department create a First Charge? SC answers
Supreme Court: The Division Bench of L. Nageswara Rao and Vineet Saran*, JJ., quashed the confiscation order of Customs and Central Excise
Evolving Jurisprudence in Connection with SARFAESI vis-à-vis Pending Statutory Dues
by Rahul Chakraborti†, Prashamsha Tulachan†† and Saumya Agarwal†††
Cite as: 2022 SCC OnLine Blog Exp 27
Does a forfeiture clause imply that the entire deposit amount can be forfeited? Madras HC elaborates
Madras High Court: Sanjib Banerjee, J., addressed whether this Court is the appropriate forum to decide the quantum that can be forfeited
Does the remedy under Section 14 of SARFAESI Act becomes redundant if DM is unable to take possession of secured assets within time limit? Read what SC says
Supreme Court: The 3-judge bench of L. Nageswara Rao, Hemant Gupta* and Ajay Rastogi, JJ has upheld Kerala High Court’s decision holding
PMLA | Properties acquired before commission of offence cannot be attached as IBC takes precedence over PMLA
Appellate Tribunal for SAFEMA, FEMA, PMLA, NDPS and PBPT Act: Justice Manmohan Singh (Chairman) allowed an appeal filed by a consortium of
CJM competent to deal with the application moved by the secured creditor under Section 14 of SARFAESI Act
Supreme Court: The bench of AM Khanwilkar and Dinesh Maheshwari, JJ has held that the Chief Judicial Magistrate (CJM) is competent to
SC| Secured creditor can file winding up petition even after obtaining a recovery certificate from DRT
Supreme Court: In a case dealing with companies defaulting a loan of Rs. 48 Crores including interest from Kotak Mahindra Bank, the