Banking
Banking industry is the heart of any country. In India, so many scams particularly in the Public Sector Banks have been detected and identified. Now, PNB scam has been revealed. All those things point out the requirement of better mechanism in the field of Banking. Banking industry deals with the public money as the same requires much attention. The only way to save the Banking industry is to reduce the defaulters. The rising of NPA is a big concern. In India, there are so many enactments, which are periodically introduced for better recovery process. The examples are SARFEASI Act, Companies Act, 2013, Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 and so on. All require deep legal knowledge even for understanding those laws. Everybody needs to know such Law as everyone in the country will be directly or indirectly affected one way or the other. Growing of such Laws necessitate the requirement of Lawyers in the field of Banking.
Important and Latest Judgments
Banking
V.Sridhar v the authorised officer Indian bank – 2018-1-LW 15
Merely by including a clause as is where is or as is what is condition in the sale notice does not obviate the bank from disclosing encumbrance- Auction purchaser entitled for refund
Axis Bank Versus SBS Organics Private Limited And Another -2016 12 SCC 18
The partial deposit before the DRAT as a pre-condition for considering the appeal on merits in terms of Section 18 of the Act, is not a secured asset. It is not a secured debt either, since the borrower or the aggrieved person has not created any security interest on such pre-deposit in favour of the secured creditor. If that be so, on disposal of the appeal, either on merits or on withdrawal, or on being rendered infructuous, in case, the appellant makes a prayer for refund of the pre-deposit, the same has to be allowed and the pre-deposit has to be returned to the appellant, unless the Appellate Tribunal, on the request of the secured creditor but with the consent of the depositors, had already appropriated the pre-deposit towards the liability of the borrower, or with the consent, had adjusted the amount towards the dues, or if there be any attachment on the pre-deposit in any proceedings under Section 13(10) of the Act read with Rule 11 of The Security Interest (Enforcement) Rules, 2002, or if there be any attachment in any other proceedings known to law.
Jagdish Singh Versus Heeralal and others – 2014-1-SCC 479
The civil court jurisdiction is completely barred, so far as the “measure” taken by a secured creditor under sub- section (4) of Section 13 of the Securitisation Act, against which an aggrieved person has a right of appeal before the DRT or the Appellate Tribunal. to determine as to whether there has been any illegality in the “measures” taken.
Narayan Chandra Ghosh – VERSUS UCO Bank & Ors. – 2011-4-SCC-548
The requirement of pre-deposit under sub-section (1) of Section 18 of the SARFAESI Act is mandatory and there is no reason whatsoever for not giving full effect to the provisions contained in Section 18 of the SARFAESI Act.
M/s Madras Petrochem Ltd. & Anr. Versus BIFR & Ors. – 2016-4-SCC 1
Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 prevails over the Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1985 to the extent of inconsistency therewith.
NESCO v. Raghunath Paper Mills (P) Ltd., (2012) 13 SCC 479
The purchaser in an auction sale conducted by the official liquidator on “as is where is” and “whatever there is” basis was found not liable for payment of the electricity arrears.
