Agricultural land under SARFAESI depends on factual character and use, not revenue records alone.

SARFAESI exemption for agricultural land depends on the factual nature and character of the secured property at the time the security interest was created. Revenue records are not conclusive; the enquiry must consider the land's use, character, and the purpose for which it was set apart. Where the High Court does not return a finding on whether the land is agricultural in nature, the matter cannot be conclusively decided on that basis and requires fresh consideration. The stated principle is that applicability of the agricultural land exclusion turns on a totality-of-facts assessment, not on revenue classification alone.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether the exemption under Section 31(i) of the SARFAESI Act turns on whether the secured property is agricultural land on the facts of the case; (ii) Whether the High Court could uphold the challenge without returning a finding on the nature of the land, or whether the matter had to be remitted for fresh consideration.

Issue (i): Whether the exemption under Section 31(i) of the SARFAESI Act turns on whether the secured property is agricultural land on the facts of the case.

Analysis: The expression "agricultural land" is not defined in the statute, and the effect of Section 31(i) depends on the nature and character of the land. Classification in revenue records is not conclusive. The relevant enquiry is whether, on the date of creation of the security interest, the land was agricultural in nature having regard to its use, character, and the purpose for which it was set apart.

Conclusion: The applicability of Section 31(i) depends on a factual determination of whether the secured property is agricultural land.

Issue (ii): Whether the High Court could uphold the challenge without returning a finding on the nature of the land, or whether the matter had to be remitted for fresh consideration.

Analysis: The High Court did not adjudicate the basic factual issue as to whether the land was agricultural in nature. In the absence of a specific finding, and applying the governing principle that the character of the land must be determined on the totality of facts and circumstances, the impugned judgment could not stand. The proper course was to set aside the judgment and restore the writ petitions for fresh decision.

Conclusion: The High Court's judgment was set aside and the matter was remitted for fresh consideration.

Final Conclusion: The appeals succeeded, the impugned judgment was overturned, and the writ petitions were restored to the High Court for an expeditious fresh disposal.

Ratio Decidendi: Whether SARFAESI applies to a secured asset claimed to be agricultural land must be decided on a factual assessment of the land's nature, use, and purpose at the time the security interest was created, and revenue classification alone is not determinative.

---