New Delhi, Sept. 24 -- The Supreme Court on Monday urged the Union finance ministry to review and amend the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest (SARFAESI) Act, flagging "glaring anomalies" in its provisions that have created a "huge mess" in enforcement of secured debt and spawned an "endless pipeline of litigation." A bench of justices JB Pardiwala and R Mahadevan, while dealing with a batch of petitions arising from a 2023 Madras high court order concerning redemption of mortgages and borrowers' loan accounts, said that the ill-wording of Section 13(8) of the SARFAESI Act and its mismatch with Rules 8 and 9 under the law had left creditors and auction purchasers "high and dry," defeating the very mandate of the legislation. Section 13 of the SARFAESI Act lays down the framework for enforcement of security interests by creditors, with sub-section (8) dealing specifically with a borrower's right to redeem a mortgaged asset. while Rules 8 and 9 prescribe the procedure for taking possession and conducting the sale of secured assets, including the manner and timeline for issuing sale notices. "Despite a catena of amendments, the glaring anomaly that we have come across in respect of Section 13(8) of the SARFAESI Act and Rules 8 and 9 of the SARFAESI Rules persists. The same renders the very mandate of the provision otiose," the bench noted. "We are, however, at our wit's end to note how the ill-wording of Section 13(8) . has resulted in a glaring inconsistency between the aforesaid provision and the SARFAESI Rules framed in lieu thereof. It is unfortunate that the ambiguities . have left the interests of secured creditors and auction purchasers high and dry." The bench underlined that the interpretative deadlock between Section 13(8) and the Rules had "single-handedly resulted in a huge mess insofar as enforcement of security interest is concerned, giving birth to an endless pipeline of litigation clogging the specialised forums of the DRT (debt recovery tribunals) and DRAT (debt recovery appellate tribunals)." The court went on to make an appeal to the Union government: "We humbly urge the Ministry of Finance to take a serious look at these provisions and bring about necessary changes, before it is too late in the day." The ruling has significant implications for both borrowers and creditors, as uncertainties around redemption rights have led to prolonged disputes, delayed recoveries and undermined the purpose of the SARFAESI Act. Simultaneously, by urging the finance ministry to step in, the court signalled that judicial interpretation alone cannot fix the structural flaws in the law....