<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2015 (3) TMI 438 - KERALA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=257502</link>
    <description>A bank may pursue recovery only through measures expressly authorised by law, such as civil proceedings, SARFAESI enforcement, or other lawful revenue recovery processes. The text states that neither the SARFAESI Act nor the Security Interest (Enforcement) Rules authorise publication of loanees&#039; photographs in newspapers as a recovery device, and RBI&#039;s wilful defaulter framework is limited to credit information channels. It further states that such publication would violate the right to dignity and privacy under Article 21, and that contractual terms cannot validate a fundamental rights breach. The threatened newspaper publication is therefore described as lacking statutory sanction and being unlawful.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 13 Aug 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 28 Feb 2015 09:58:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=378612" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2015 (3) TMI 438 - KERALA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=257502</link>
      <description>A bank may pursue recovery only through measures expressly authorised by law, such as civil proceedings, SARFAESI enforcement, or other lawful revenue recovery processes. The text states that neither the SARFAESI Act nor the Security Interest (Enforcement) Rules authorise publication of loanees&#039; photographs in newspapers as a recovery device, and RBI&#039;s wilful defaulter framework is limited to credit information channels. It further states that such publication would violate the right to dignity and privacy under Article 21, and that contractual terms cannot validate a fundamental rights breach. The threatened newspaper publication is therefore described as lacking statutory sanction and being unlawful.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 13 Aug 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=257502</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>