In Brief
ITC Limited successfully challenged a High Court order that had set aside an auction sale of a five-star hotel property in Goa. The case involved Industrial Financial Corporation of India (IFCI) enforcing a security interest over the hotel property to recover a loan of Rs. 150 crores in default. The Supreme Court held that though the creditor's failure to reply in writing to the borrower's representation (as required by Section 13(3A) of the SARFAESI Act) was technically a breach, the debtor was not entitled to discretionary relief under Articles 226 and 136 because its conduct had been merely to seek repeated extensions rather than repay the admitted debt. The Court also held that the land was not 'agricultural land' within the Act's definition, that symbolic possession was valid, and that findings of fraud and collusion lacked substance. The appeal was allowed and possession ordered to be handed over to the auction purchaser.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.