https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=108195 Section 13 of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 is treated as constitutionally valid against an Article 14 challenge because it applies to defined secured-debt defaults, carries a presumption of constitutionality, and requires prior notice to the borrower under section 13(2) before measures under section 13(4). The statutory recovery framework operates as a special enactment for secured-creditor dues. Where multiple secured creditors are involved, section 13(9) requires prior consent from creditors holding at least three-fourths of the outstanding amount before section 13(4) measures proceed; this collective-consent safeguard is mandatory. en-us Thu, 08 May 2003 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 30 Mar 2012 14:28:01 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=108195 Section 13 of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 is treated as constitutionally valid against an Article 14 challenge because it applies to defined secured-debt defaults, carries a presumption of constitutionality, and requires prior notice to the borrower under section 13(2) before measures under section 13(4). The statutory recovery framework operates as a special enactment for secured-creditor dues. Where multiple secured creditors are involved, section 13(9) requires prior consent from creditors holding at least three-fourths of the outstanding amount before section 13(4) measures proceed; this collective-consent safeguard is mandatory. Case-Laws Companies Law Thu, 08 May 2003 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=108195