In Brief
Borrowers and guarantors of a company that became a non-performing asset sought to challenge the auction sale of mortgaged properties on the ground that the second sale notice provided only 10 days instead of the mandatory 30-day notice period required under banking regulations. The Supreme Court held that when a first sale notice (with 30-day notice) fails to be executed solely due to interim orders obtained by the borrowers, a fresh 30-day notice is not required for a subsequent sale notice in continuation of the original proceedings. The Court found that the mortgagors' right of redemption had been extinguished upon registration of the sale in 2012, and their subsequent litigation across multiple forums constituted dilatory tactics to defeat the SARFAESI Act's purpose. The Court dismissed the appeals and directed the mortgagors to vacate the properties and pay rent collected since 2012."
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.