Banks are commercial organizations, for profit. Lending on risky loan proposals is a necessary evil for banks. Large part of this credit exposure is towards business loans, home loans, loans to priority sector, education loans and other unsecured loans. Sometimes, such loans are defaulted either due to economic circumstances, business failure or wilful default by the borrower. Banks recognize such default as NPA as per guidelines issued by RBI. The problemof NPA casts dark shadows of distrust over the Indian banking system. For recovery, banks take recourse under the SARFAESI Act or other relevant laws. The delays caused due to the protracted legal battles, erodes the value of collaterals placed by the borrower. Therefore, the lenders always find themselves in the midst of legal disputes with the borrowers. Not only, have the banks needed to be more vigilant in selection of loan proposals after due credit appraisal, but also, the Indian legal system needs to proactively act to curb the menace. This paper follows a doctrinal research methodology for studying the current judicial interventions in the sphere of credit default. It advances judicial thoughts and ratios pronounced in the judgments of High Courts and the Supreme Court of India in dealing with such cases of default. The judicial doctrines have been studied through a series of cases and judgments dealing with on constitutional validity of the definition of ‘NPA’, jurisdictional issues, attempts to bypass the authority of the Debt Recovery Tribunals, violation of principles of natural justice by lenders, cases of wilful default, public declaration of NPA accounts, liability of guarantors, penal interest, possession of collateralized property and referral of matters to the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code for resolution of debt. The study finds that the Indian High Courts and the Supreme Court on many landmark and recent cases provided relief to borrowers, where, the rights of the borrowers have been violated by lenders. In most cases, the courts decided in favour of lenders where the borrowers have committed wilful default, attempted forum shopping or abused the process of law. The courts have always attempted to serve economic justice to parties of the dispute