https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=335297 A sale deed executed after initiation of proceedings under the SARFAESI Act was treated as void because Section 13(13) bars transfer of secured assets without the secured creditor's prior written consent, so no right, title or interest passed to the transferee. On that basis, the DRT ought not to have entertained the securitisation application or restrained the bank's recovery steps, as the transferee had no locus to challenge proceedings founded on a void transaction. The District Magistrate's possession order under Section 14 was found unobjectionable, and the bank's symbolic and physical possession supported its right to proceed with the e-auction. The alternative appeal remedy was considered unavailable in the circumstances, so writ jurisdiction was exercised and the DRT order was quashed. en-us Thu, 01 Sep 2016 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 30 Nov 2016 10:19:03 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=335297 A sale deed executed after initiation of proceedings under the SARFAESI Act was treated as void because Section 13(13) bars transfer of secured assets without the secured creditor's prior written consent, so no right, title or interest passed to the transferee. On that basis, the DRT ought not to have entertained the securitisation application or restrained the bank's recovery steps, as the transferee had no locus to challenge proceedings founded on a void transaction. The District Magistrate's possession order under Section 14 was found unobjectionable, and the bank's symbolic and physical possession supported its right to proceed with the e-auction. The alternative appeal remedy was considered unavailable in the circumstances, so writ jurisdiction was exercised and the DRT order was quashed. Case-Laws Indian Laws Thu, 01 Sep 2016 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=335297