<?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>2013 (8) TMI 1180 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=309477</link>
    <description>After confirmation of a SARFAESI auction sale and issuance of the sale certificate, the Authorised Officer had no power to cancel the concluded sale unilaterally; such cancellation was without jurisdiction and offended natural justice. The sale certificate issued by an Authorised Officer was not covered by the Registration Act exemption applicable to civil or revenue officers, but non-registration did not defeat the purchaser&#039;s title arising from a completed sale. A later settlement between the borrower and secured creditor could not revive redemption rights or displace the auction purchaser&#039;s vested rights. The purchaser was entitled to possession and documents needed for mutation, and the cancellation letter was set aside.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 23 Aug 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 05 Sep 2023 14:23:22 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=725169" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2013 (8) TMI 1180 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=309477</link>
      <description>After confirmation of a SARFAESI auction sale and issuance of the sale certificate, the Authorised Officer had no power to cancel the concluded sale unilaterally; such cancellation was without jurisdiction and offended natural justice. The sale certificate issued by an Authorised Officer was not covered by the Registration Act exemption applicable to civil or revenue officers, but non-registration did not defeat the purchaser&#039;s title arising from a completed sale. A later settlement between the borrower and secured creditor could not revive redemption rights or displace the auction purchaser&#039;s vested rights. The purchaser was entitled to possession and documents needed for mutation, and the cancellation letter was set aside.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 23 Aug 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=309477</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>