The outgoing Chief Justice of India disclosed that a retired High Court Chief Justice had attempted to influence a judicial member of the NCLAT in a corporate matter. As the implicated judge retired before a formal inquiry could be commenced, the issue has been placed before the new CJI Surya Kant for administrative action.

The Supreme Court clarified that Chartered Accountants cannot be required to possess 25 years of experience to be eligible for appointment as Technical Members in tribunals, declaring the requirement unconstitutional and extending parity with earlier rulings concerning advocates.

The Kerala High Court held that a pre-deposit under Section 18 SARFAESI cannot exceed the auction value of the concerned asset and that any reduction from the mandatory 50% threshold must be supported by written reasons.

The Allahabad High Court held that an auction purchaser buying property on an ‘as is where is’ basis assumes full responsibility for undisclosed liabilities and cannot seek relief for society dues discovered after the sale.

Kerala High Court held that writ petitions under Article 226 are not maintainable in SARFAESI matters where an effective remedy before the DRT exists under Section 17.

The Supreme Court ruled that under Section 17(5) of the SARFAESI Act, DRTs must dispose of securitisation applications within sixty days, extendable to four months with recorded reasons, and directed strict compliance with the statutory timeline.

RBI’s 15-day banking rule mandates all banks to process key requests and claim settlements within 15 calendar days, strengthening transparency, accountability, and customer trust.

NCLAT held that Section 14 of the Limitation Act cannot be applied to extend limitation for a Section 7 IBC application where prior DRT proceedings were validly instituted, rendering such applications time-barred.

NCLAT ruled that a borrower’s redemption right under amended Section 13(8) of the SARFAESI Act ends once the auction notice is issued, rendering subsequent sales immune from challenge under the IBC even during moratorium, thereby safeguarding secured creditor actions and public auction integrity.

The Rajasthan High Court upheld DRAT’s discretion under Section 19(20) of the RDB Act to reduce interest granted by DRT, ruling that a reasoned exercise of such discretion cannot be interfered with in writ jurisdiction.