<?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>2025 (12) TMI 1067 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=783527</link>
    <description>Enforcement under the SARFAESI Act is available only where a valid security interest has been created in favour of a secured creditor; a loan and guarantee arrangement alone is insufficient. On the facts described, no mortgage or equivalent security arrangement existed, so recourse to Sections 13 and 14 was not maintainable and the availability of Section 17 did not cure that jurisdictional defect. The text also notes that Article 371A and the absence of an applicable notification limited the Act&#039;s operation in Nagaland at the relevant time, so recovery measures taken earlier could not validly proceed there. The lender was left to pursue any other remedies available in law.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 16 Dec 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 18 Dec 2025 08:01:58 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=872398" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2025 (12) TMI 1067 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=783527</link>
      <description>Enforcement under the SARFAESI Act is available only where a valid security interest has been created in favour of a secured creditor; a loan and guarantee arrangement alone is insufficient. On the facts described, no mortgage or equivalent security arrangement existed, so recourse to Sections 13 and 14 was not maintainable and the availability of Section 17 did not cure that jurisdictional defect. The text also notes that Article 371A and the absence of an applicable notification limited the Act&#039;s operation in Nagaland at the relevant time, so recovery measures taken earlier could not validly proceed there. The lender was left to pursue any other remedies available in law.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 16 Dec 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=783527</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>