Can a Borrower Redeem After the Sale Notice Is Published Under Amended Section 13(8) of the SARFAESI Act?

 

Summary

Category Data
Court Supreme Court of India
Case Number C.A. No.-012174-012174 – 2025
Diary Number 20228/2023
Judge Name HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE J.B. PARDIWALA
Bench HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE J.B. PARDIWALA & HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE K.V. VISWANATHAN
Precedent Value Binding
Overrules / Affirms Affirms Bafna Motors; overrules Concern Readymix and Pal Alloys
Type of Law Statutory interpretation of the SARFAESI Act and Rules
Questions of Law
  • Does amended Section 13(8) extinguish redemption on sale-notice publication?
  • Do Rules 8(6) & 9(1) require one or two notices of sale?
  • Does the 2016 amendment apply to loans predating 1 September 2016?
Ratio Decidendi

The 2016 amendment to Section 13(8) of the SARFAESI Act extinguishes a borrower’s right of redemption upon publication of the sale notice, regardless of mode of transfer. The SARFAESI Rules (8(6), its proviso and 9(1)) envisage a single composite notice of sale—service, publication, affixation and upload may occur simultaneously, followed by a 30-day sale window. As a special law, the amended provision overrides the general right under Section 60 TP Act. The amendment applies to all notices published after 1 September 2016.

Judgments Relied Upon
  • Mathew Varghese v. Amritha Kumar (2014) 5 SCC 610
  • Celir LLP v. Bafna Motors (2024) 2 SCC 1
  • Mardia Chemicals Ltd. v. Union of India (2004) 4 SCC 311
  • Madras Petrochem Ltd. v. BIFR (2016) 4 SCC 1
  • United Bank of India v. Satyawati Tondon (2010) 8 SCC 110
  • Canara Bank v. M. Amarender Reddy (2017) 4 SCC 735
Logic / Jurisprudence / Authorities Relied Upon by the Court
  • Legislative history and object of SARFAESI Act: expeditious recovery & securitisation
  • Sections 35 & 37: special law override general law on securities
  • Purposive interpretation to harmonise Act & Rules
  • Principles under Section 60 TP Act applied pre-amendment; special Act now prevails
  • Single “notice of sale” concept under Rules 8 & 9
Facts as Summarised by the Court

Borrowers availed credit facilities in January 2016 and defaulted, leading to NPA classification (Dec 2019). The Bank issued Section 13(2)&(4) notices, took possession (Oct 2020) and published an auction notice (22 Jan 2021). Appellants bid successfully (Feb 2021), paid the price, and received a sale certificate (22 Mar 2021). Borrowers paid outstanding dues only after notice publication and sought redemption in the High Court, which quashed the sale—leading to this appeal.

Practical Impact

Category Impact
Binding On All Debt Recovery Tribunals, Debt Recovery Appellate Tribunals, High Courts and subordinate courts
Persuasive For Other High Courts and the Supreme Court on SARFAESI interpretation
Overrules
  • Concern Readymix v. Corporation Bank (2018 SCC OnLine Hyd 783)
  • Pal Alloys & Metal India Pvt. Ltd. v. Allahabad Bank (2021 SCC OnLine P&H 2733)
Distinguishes
  • Amme Srisailam v. Union Bank of India (2022 SCC OnLine AP 3484)
  • Indian Overseas Bank v. RA Pure Life Science Ltd. (2023 SCC OnLine TS 634)
Follows Celir LLP v. Bafna Motors (Mumbai) Pvt. Ltd. (2024) 2 SCC 1

What’s New / What Lawyers Should Note

  • The borrower’s redemption right under Section 13(8) is lost on publication of the sale notice, not on hammer-fall or sale completion.
  • SARFAESI Rules (8(6), proviso, 8(7), 9(1)) require a single composite “notice of sale” that may be served, published, affixed and uploaded on the same day, followed by a 30-day auction/tender period.
  • The amended Section 13(8) applies to all notices published on or after 1 September 2016, regardless of when the loan was sanctioned.
  • As a special law, amended Section 13(8) overrides Section 60 TP Act; no artificial distinction by mode of sale.
  • Overrules decisions imposing dual-notice or extended-period requirements; quashes third-party maneuvers post-notice.

Summary of Legal Reasoning

  1. Legislative Purpose: SARFAESI Act enacted to expedite recovery, empower non-court enforcement.
  2. Statutory Scheme: Sections 13(8), 35, 37; Rules 8 & 9 define sale mechanics and redemption cut-off.
  3. Unamended vs Amended: Pre-2016, redemption lasted until transfer. Post-2016, redemption window closes upon sale-notice publication.
  4. Special Law vs General Law: Amended Section 13(8) (special) overrides TP Act Section 60 (general).
  5. Notice Requirement: Only one composite “notice of sale” is mandated, regardless of mode—serve borrower & publish/affix/upload as per Rules; 30-day sale gap.
  6. Conflict Resolution: Affirms Bafna Motors; overrules High Court decisions requiring dual notices or longer redemption windows.
  7. Retrospectivity: Amendment applies to all sale-notices published on/after 1 Sept 2016, covering ongoing NPAs.

Arguments by the Parties

Petitioner (Auction Purchasers)

  • High Court erred in quashing sale certificate and admitting redemption post-notice.
  • Ratio in Bafna Motors covers similar facts post-amendment; right to redeem expires on notice publication.

Respondent Borrowers

  • Bafna Motors not applicable; loan sanctioned before 2016 amendment, so unamended Section 13(8) prevails.
  • Amendment not retrospective; redemption should await sale completion.

Factual Background

Borrowers took a cash-credit and term-loan facility in January 2016, defaulted and were declared NPA in December 2019. The Bank took possession (Oct 2020), published an auction notice under Rule 8(6)/9(1) on 22 Jan 2021, and auctioned the property on 26 Feb 2021. Appellants deposited the sale price and received a sale certificate on 22 Mar 2021. Borrowers tendered dues only after notice publication and succeeded in the High Court, prompting this appeal.

Statutory Analysis

  • Section 13(8) SARFAESI Act (as amended 1 Sept 2016): borrower’s redemption cut-off is “before the date of publication of notice” for any mode of transfer.
  • Rule 8(6) SARFAESI Rules: serve 30-day “notice of sale” to borrower; proviso mandates publication for auction/tender; Rule 8(7) & Rule 9(1) regulate affixation, upload & sale timing.
  • Sections 35 & 37 SARFAESI Act: special-law non-obstante and non-derogation clauses override general laws including Transfer of Property Act.

Alert Indicators

  • 🚨 Breaking Precedent – Conflicts with earlier High Court decisions overturned
  • ✔ Precedent Followed – Bafna Motors reaffirmed
  • 🔄 Conflicting Decisions – Resolves divergence over notice requirements and redemption cut-off

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Recent Comments

No comments to show.