The Proposed IEPF Fast-Track for Small Claims: What It Would Change, and Why It Is Not Live Yet

Over the last few months a claim has spread across share recovery websites: that low-value IEPF claims are now settled within thirty days. If you are deciding whether to file, or whether to wait, it is worth knowing exactly what that claim rests on — because it describes a proposal, not the current law.

What was proposed

On 29 January 2026 the Ministry of Corporate Affairs published a consultation on the refund process at the IEPF Authority and invited public comment. Its headline was a streamlined route for small-value claims, defined as:

• Physical shares worth up to ₹5 lakh
• Dematerialised shares worth up to ₹15 lakh
• Dividend claims up to ₹10,000

For claims within those limits, the proposal was that the Authority would dispose of them within 30 days, relying solely on the company's verification report rather than conducting its own further examination. The consultation also proposed a formal appeal mechanism for rejected claims and more clearly defined responsibilities for companies.

It is a sensible proposal. The IEPF Authority's own review stage has been one of the places claims queue, and removing it for small, straightforward cases would shorten a great many of them.

What we cannot confirm

A consultation is the stage *before* a rule. It invites comment; it does not change anything. For the fast-track to apply to your claim, the amendment has to be notified in the official gazette with an effective date.

As at the date of this article we have not been able to identify a notification bringing the small-claims route into force. We would rather say that plainly than repeat a thirty-day promise that may not apply to you. If it is notified, we will update this page with the date.

Why this matters in practice: if you delay filing because you expect a thirty-day turnaround, and the rule is not in force, you have simply lost time. If an agent quotes you thirty days on the strength of it, ask them for the notification.

What has actually changed — and is in force

The confusion is understandable, because the IEPF rules really have been amended twice in the last two years, and reports of the changes tend to run together.

• September 2024.: The documentation threshold for dematerialised shares was raised from ₹5 lakh to ₹15 lakh, so more demat claims fall into the lighter documentation category. A police complaint for lost physical certificates became necessary only where the shares are worth more than ₹5 lakh.
• 6 October 2025.: Form IEPF-5 was substituted with a revised form, with tighter validation on the MCA portal. What the revised IEPF-5 changed.

Notice that ₹5 lakh and ₹15 lakh appear in both the 2024 amendment and the 2026 proposal, and they mean different things. In the 2024 rules they decide how much documentation a claim needs, and that is law. In the 2026 consultation they would decide which claims get the thirty-day route, and that is not yet law. Seeing the same two numbers in both is very likely how the proposal came to be described as already in force.

What the fast-track would not change, even if notified

It is worth being realistic about the limits of the proposal:

• The company's verification still decides the outcome.: If anything, the proposal makes the company's report more decisive, because nothing else would stand behind it. A claim with a name mismatch or the wrong demat details would still be returned. Why IEPF claims are rejected.
• Claims above the limits are unaffected.: A physical holding worth more than ₹5 lakh, or a dividend balance above ₹10,000, would follow the ordinary route.
• Deceased shareholders still need succession evidence.: The claim must still establish who is entitled; a faster disposal does not make heirship evidence unnecessary. IEPF claims when the shareholder has died.
• Valuation is not obvious.: Whether a holding sits under ₹5 lakh depends on current market value after bonuses and splits, which is frequently much higher than a family expects. What old certificates are actually worth.

So should you wait?

No. A claim filed now proceeds under the rules in force now, and if the fast-track is later notified, a correctly documented claim is in the best position to benefit from whatever transition arrangements apply. A claim that has not been filed benefits from nothing.

The work that makes a claim fast is the same under either regime: a demat account in the claimant's own name, a current Client Master List, consistent names across folio, PAN and supporting documents, and a complete packet to the company's Nodal Officer. That is where time is actually won or lost.

The broader point

Unclaimed assets attract confident claims, and some of them are about the law rather than about a particular firm. When you read that something has changed, look for the notification and its effective date. A consultation paper, a press report or a competitor's blog is not the same thing — including this one, which is why we have told you what we could not confirm.

If you would like us to check where your own claim stands, or whether a holding would fall within the proposed limits, start with a free assessment.