Gujarat High CourtBanking and Finance LawTax Law

Secured Creditors’ Priority Under Section 31B of RDB Act Overrides Statutory Charges and Government Dues

HANSRAJ DWARKA PRASADv.STATE OF GUJARAT

Secured Creditors’ Priority Under Section 31B of RDB Act Overrides Statutory Charges and Government Dues. HANSRAJ DWARKA PRASAD vs STATE OF GUJARAT. Gujarat High Court. LawLens
The LawLens card for this judgmentXLinkedInWhatsApp

In brief

The question

1. Whether a statutory charge created under Section 48 of the Gujarat Value Added Tax Act, 2003, prevails over the security interest of a secured creditor under the RDB Act

The court held

The Court allowed the petition, holding that the statutory charge under the Gujarat Value Added Tax Act ceased to operate against the subject land upon its sale to the petitioners

It also directed

The Court ruled that secured creditors have absolute priority over government dues under Section 31B of the RDB Act

Consequently, the Court directed respondent nos. 1 to 3 to remove Mutation Entry No. 5854 and any other charges related to the original borrower’s tax dues from the revenue records of the subject land within twelve weeks; Rule was made absolute

01Facts

The petitioners purchased the subject land (Plot Nos. 1–12, Village Karanj, Surat) through a public e-auction conducted by the Recovery Officer-II, DRT-II, Ahmedabad, under the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993 ("RDB Act")

p. 3

The land was originally mortgaged to respondent no. 4 (Bank) in 2006-2007 by M/s. Salasar Polyfab Pvt. Ltd. to secure debts exceeding ₹85 crores

pp. 2-3

The petitioners were declared highest bidders in August 2019, deposited the full consideration, and a registered sale deed was executed on 27.01.2020 following DRT confirmation

p. 4

Despite a previous judgment in SCA No. 10314 of 2021 removing an Income Tax attachment, a new charge (Mutation Entry No. 5854) was created by the State VAT authorities (respondent no. 3) on 19.12.2020 for outstanding tax dues of the original borrower

p. 5, 8

02Issues

i.1. Whether a statutory charge created under Section 48 of the Gujarat Value Added Tax Act, 2003, prevails over the security interest of a secured creditor under the RDB Act

pp. 5-7

ii.2. Whether the respondent authorities are legally obligated to remove the revenue record entries regarding tax dues for a property sold via a DRT-authorized auction

pp. 7-8

03Law Applied

The Court primarily applied Section 31B of the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993, which grants secured creditors priority to realize debts via the sale of assets over all other debts and Government dues, including revenues, taxes, and cesses due to Central or State Governments

p. 9

The Court relied on the Division Bench precedent in Kalupur Commercial Cooperative Bank Ltd. & Anr. v. State of Gujarat & Anr. (2020), which established that Section 31B is a substantive provision with a non-obstante clause that overrides state tax laws

pp. 12-14

It further referred to Punjab National Bank v. Union of India (2022) and Connectwell Industries Pvt. Ltd. v. Union of India (2020), affirming that secured creditors’ dues take preference over "Crown debts" unless a statute specifically dictates otherwise

pp. 10-12

Provisions in the judgment · 6 · Linked ones open on LawLens

Recovery Of Debts And Bankruptcy Act, 1993 Section 2Section 18

Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 Section 2Section 13Section 35Section 37

04Reasoning

The Court reasoned that the priority of the secured creditor (the Bank) was established the moment the security interest was created in 2006-2007, long before the VAT department attempted to attach the property in 2020

p. 2, 8

The Bench observed that Section 31B of the RDB Act, introduced via amendment in 2016, contains an express non-obstante clause intended by Parliament to give precedence to secured creditors over Government revenues

p. 13

The Court noted that the petitioners, as bona fide auction purchasers under a central recovery statute, cannot be burdened by the tax liabilities of the previous owner

p. 9

Applying the logic from the petitioners' previous litigation (SCA No. 10314 of 2021), the Court found that the VAT department's charge was legally unsustainable because the secured creditor’s right to recover precedes state tax claims by virtue of federal legislative intent

p. 8, 14

05Holding

The Court allowed the petition, holding that the statutory charge under the Gujarat Value Added Tax Act ceased to operate against the subject land upon its sale to the petitioners

p. 15

The Court ruled that secured creditors have absolute priority over government dues under Section 31B of the RDB Act

p. 9

Consequently, the Court directed respondent nos. 1 to 3 to remove Mutation Entry No. 5854 and any other charges related to the original borrower’s tax dues from the revenue records of the subject land within twelve weeks; Rule was made absolute

p. 15
Gujarat High Court

Original Court PDF

HANSRAJ DWARKA PRASADvsSTATE OF GUJARAT

Gujarat High Court · July 07, 2026

Click to open original judgment

Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in

Click to open original judgment