Created byFuzzy Cloud

Legislation

Banking Regulation Act, 1949

102 Supreme Court judgments cite this Act.

M/S. SARDAR ASSOCIATES & ORS.versusPUNJAB & SINDH BANK & ORS.

2009 INSC 98931 July 2009Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants, borrowers of a public sector bank, sought a one‑time settlement of their non‑performing loan under RBI guidelines, offering to pay Rs 345.31 lacs, but the bank demanded a higher amount and refused. The Debt Recovery Appellate Tribunal directed the bank to settle as per the RBI scheme, a decision later s

PIRAMAL CAPITAL AND HOUSING FINANCE LIMITED (FORMERLY KNOWN AS DEWAN HOUSING FINANCE CORPORATION LIMITED)versus63 MOONS TECHNOLOGIES LIMITED & OTHERS

2025 INSC 42131 March 2025Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined the corporate insolvency resolution of Dewan Housing Finance Corporation Ltd (DHFL), where Piramal Capital submitted a resolution plan (RP) that allocated recoveries from Section 66 applications to itself. The plan was approved by the Committee of Creditors (CoC) and the National Company Law

BHARAT STEEL TUBES LIMITEDversusIFCI LIMITED

2010 INSC 83730 November 2010Disposed off

Bharat Steel Tubes Ltd. had borrowed money from Punjab National Bank and entered into a one‑time settlement, paying only part of the amount. It later engaged Assets Care Enterprises Ltd. (ACE) to pay the balance, and ACE assigned its rights to IFCI Ltd. IFCI invoked the SARFAESI Act to enforce security and sought aucti

HDFC BANK LTD. & ORSversusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

2022 INSC 105630 September 2022Dismissed

The Supreme Court considered a batch of writ petitions filed by several banks challenging the Reserve Bank of India's directions to disclose confidential information under the Right to Information Act, 2005. The banks argued that the directions conflicted with Section 8 of the RTI Act, the RBI Act and the Banking Regul

ICICI BANK LIMITEDversusOFFICIAL LIQUIDATOR OF APS STAR INDUSTRIES LTD. AND ORS.

2010 INSC 66330 September 2010Appeal(s) allowed

ICICI Bank assigned a portfolio of non‑performing assets (NPAs) worth Rs 52.45 crore to Kotak Mahindra Bank under a deed of assignment. One of the borrowers, APS Star Industries Ltd., entered liquidation and Kotak sought to be substituted as the secured creditor in the winding‑up proceedings. The Company Court and the

HARI BABU THOTAversus*

2023 INSC 105629 November 2023Appeal(s) allowed

Shree Aashraya Infra‑Con Ltd was placed under corporate insolvency resolution process (CIRP) and the appointed resolution professional, Hari Babu Thota, submitted a resolution plan drafted by the promoters and approved by the Committee of Creditors. The National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) dismissed the plan, holding t

UNITED COMMERCIAL BANK, CALCUTTAversusCOMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, WEST BENGAL-III CALCUTTA.

1999 INSC 44929 September 1999Appeal(s) allowed

United Commercial Bank, a nationalised bank, valued its investments at cost in the statutory balance sheet but, for income‑tax returns, valued the same stock‑in‑trade at the lower of cost or market value, a practice it had followed consistently for over thirty years and which the tax department had accepted. The bank c

RAMAKRISHNA MISSION & ANR.versusKAGO KUNYA & ORS.

2019 INSC 29528 February 2019Appeal(s) allowed

The respondent, a hospital employee, challenged his superannuation order by filing a writ petition under Article 226 against Ramakrishna Mission and its hospital, alleging that the institution was a 'State' within Art.12 and thus amenable to writ jurisdiction. The High Court initially held the Mission to be a State and

KESHAVLAL KHEMCHANDAND SONS PVT. LTD. & OTHERSversusUNION OF INDIA & OTHERS

2015 INSC 7228 January 2015

The Supreme Court examined the constitutional validity of the amendment to Section 2(1)(o) of the SARFAESI Act, which altered the definition of a non‑performing asset (NPA) to allow different regulators to prescribe classification guidelines for their respective creditors. The petitioners argued that this amounted to c

MEHSANA DISTRICT CENTRAL COOPERATIVE BANK LTD. AND ORS.versusSTATE OF GUJARAT AND ORS.

2004 INSC 6428 January 2004Dismissed

Mehsana District Central Cooperative Bank Ltd., a cooperative bank registered under the Gujarat Co‑operative Societies Act, 1961, invested in a mutual fund without obtaining the State Government's permission required under Section 71 of that Act. The State of Gujarat sought a writ of mandamus directing authorities to i

INDIAN BANKversusK. USHA AND ANR. ETC. ETC.

1998 INSC 4228 January 1998

The Bank of Thanjavur was amalgamated with Indian Bank under a Scheme of Amalgamation framed pursuant to Section 45 of the Banking Regulation Act, 1949. The heirs of employees who died while in service of the transferor bank claimed compassionate appointments based on a 1982 settlement entered into under Section 2(p) o

M/S NEW HORIZON SUGAR MILLS LTD.versusGOVT. OF PONDICHERRY TH. ADDL. SEC. & ANR.

2012 INSC 43027 September 2012Dismissed

New Horizon Sugar Mills Ltd and its directors, who had guaranteed a bank loan, defaulted and faced attachment of their properties under the Pondicherry Protection of Interest of Depositors in Financial Establishments Act, 2004. They challenged the validity of that Act and a government order attaching properties, arguin

GOVT. OF INDIA AND ORS.versusCOURT LIQUIDATORS EMPLOYEES ASSOCIATION AND ORS.

1999 INSC 36227 August 1999Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined the claim of Company Paid Staff employed in the offices of the Official Liquidator and Court Liquidator across several High Courts, who had served for 10‑25 years on low pay without permanent status or retirement benefits. They filed writ petitions seeking to be regularised as Central Governm

STATE BANK OF INDIA & ORSversusRAJESH AGARWAL & ORS

2023 INSC 30327 March 2023Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined civil appeals filed by State Bank of India and other banks challenging the classification of borrowers' accounts as fraudulent under the RBI's 2016 Master Directions on Frauds. Borrowers contended that the directions denied them a hearing before such classification, violating the principles o

N.M. VEERAPPAversusCANARA BANK

1998 INSC 4127 January 1998Appeal(s) allowed

Canara Bank sued a partnership firm and its partners for recovery of a loan secured by an equitable mortgage. The trial court awarded interest at the contractual rate of 16.5% on the balance up to the date of suit and at a reduced rate of 6% per annum for future interest from the date of suit. The Karnataka High Court

FEDERAL BANK LTD.versusSAGAR THOMAS AND OTHERS

2003 INSC 51526 September 2003Appeal(s) allowed

The respondent, Sagar Thomas, a branch manager of Federal Bank, was dismissed after a disciplinary enquiry and challenged the dismissal by filing a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution. The High Court held the petition maintainable, deeming the bank a public authority performing a public duty. The bank a

THE STATE BANK OF INDIA & OTHERSversusP. SOUPRAMANIANE

2019 INSC 57926 April 2019Dismissed

P. Soupramian, a messenger employed by State Bank of India, stabbed two individuals with a broken soda bottle and was convicted under Section 324 of the Indian Penal Code, receiving a three‑month imprisonment. The bank discharged him under Section 10(1)(b)(i) of the Banking Regulation Act, 1949, which bars persons conv

VIMAL CHANDRA GROVERversusBANK OF INDIA

2000 INSC 25426 April 2000Appeal(s) allowed

V.C. Grover obtained an overdraft facility from Bank of India by pledging shares and later requested the bank to sell 500 of those shares to clear part of his overdraft. The bank delayed the sale for several months, during which the share price fell dramatically, causing Grover a loss. He filed a complaint before the N

CANARA BANKversusP.R.N. UPADHYAYA AND ORS.

1998 INSC 31925 August 1998Case Allowed

Canara Bank had advanced three loans to a landlord for constructing strong rooms that the bank later leased. The loans were subject to demand promissory notes stipulating interest rates above the RBI rate, compounded quarterly, and the bank debited interest at the contractual rates with quarterly rests. The landlord an

SRINIVASA ENTERPRISES & ORS.versusUNION OF INDIA ETC.

1980 INSC 18924 September 1980Dismissed

The Supreme Court examined the constitutionality of the Prize Chits and Money Circulation Schemes (Banning) Act, 1978, which imposes a total ban on prize chit schemes. Petitioners argued that the ban violated the fundamental right to trade under Art.19(1)(g), was discriminatory under Art.14, and exceeded Parliament's l

SEPCO ELECTRIC POWER CONSTRUCTION CORPORATIONversusPOWER MECH PROJECTS LTD.

2021 INSC 41724 August 2021

The appellant SEPCO, a Chinese corporation, was awarded a large arbitration award in favour of the Indian respondent Power Mech Projects. The High Court, under Section 9 of the Arbitration Act, directed SEPCO to furnish a Rs 30 crore bank guarantee from a "scheduled bank located in India". SEPCO complied by obtaining a

SMALL SCALE INDUSTRIAL MANUFACTURES ASSOCIATION (REGD.)versusUNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS

2021 INSC 20323 March 2021Case Partly allowed

The Small Scale Industrial Manufactures Association and several other industry groups filed writ petitions under Article 32 seeking a mandamus directing the Union of India, the Ministry of Finance and the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) to grant a total waiver of interest, extend the loan moratorium, provide sector‑wise re

CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION, BANK SECURITIES & FRAUD CELLversusRAMESH GELLI AND OTHERS

2016 INSC 13423 February 2016Case Partly allowed

The Central Bureau of Investigation appealed against orders that held the Chairman‑cum‑Managing Director and Executive Director of Global Trust Bank (a private bank before its 2004 amalgamation with Oriental Bank of Commerce) were not public servants for purposes of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (PC Act). The

H.L. TREHAN AND ORS. ETC.versusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS. ETC.

1988 INSC 35122 November 1988Dismissed

The Caltex (Acquisition of Shares of Caltex Refining (India) Ltd. and of the Undertakings in India of Caltex (India) Ltd.) Act, 1977 transferred the undertaking of Caltex Oil Refinery (India) Ltd. (CORIL) to the Government and later to Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd. After the takeover, the Board of Directors of C

CENTRAL BANK OF INDIA AND ORS.versusMADAN CHANDRA BRAHMA AND ANR.

2007 INSC 85622 August 2007Appeal(s) allowed

Madan Chandra Brahma was appointed temporarily in Gauhati Bank in 1969 and later promoted to officer. After successive mergers, he became an officer of Central Bank of India in 1990. He claimed retirement at age 60, invoking clause 1.2 of Regulation 19 of the Central Bank of India (Officers) Service Regulations, 1979,

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRAversus63 MOONS TECHNOLOGIES LTD.

2022 INSC 46522 April 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Maharashtra sought attachment of the properties of 63 Moons Technologies, which holds 99.99% of National Spot Exchange Ltd. (NSEL), under the Maharashtra Protection of Interest of Depositors (in Financial Establishments) Act, 1999, alleging that NSEL is a financial establishment that accepted deposits and

BHARAT CO-OPERATIVE BANK (MUMBAI) LTD.versusCO-OPERATIVE BANK EMPLOYEES UNION

2007 INSC 33122 March 2007Dismissed

Bharat Co-operative Bank (Mumbai) Ltd., a multi‑state co‑operative bank, challenged the jurisdiction of the Maharashtra Trade Union Act, arguing that under Section 2(a) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 the "appropriate Government" for a "Banking Company" with branches in more than one state is the Central Governmen

CELIR LLPversusBAFNA MOTORS (MUMBAI) PVT. LTD. & ORS.

2023 INSC 83821 September 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The borrowers defaulted on a loan secured by a mortgage over land in Navi Mumbai, prompting Union Bank of India to initiate SARFAESI proceedings and eventually conduct a public auction. The appellant, CELIR LLP, was the highest bidder, paid the full bid amount, and received a sale confirmation, but the bank withheld th

STATE BANK OF TRAVANCOREversusMOHAMMED MOHAMMED KHAN

1981 INSC 14621 August 1981Dismissed

The respondent, an agriculturist, owed an overdraft of over Rs. 3,000 to Kottayam Orient Bank Ltd., which was amalgamated into the State Bank of Travancore (a subsidiary bank) in 1961. After a decree for recovery was obtained by the bank, the respondent sought relief under the Kerala Agriculturists' Debt Relief Act, 19

FEDERAL BANK LTD. AND ORS.versusSTATE OF KERALA AND ORS.

2007 INSC 32821 March 2007Dismissed

Federal Bank Ltd. and other banks challenged notices issued by the Kerala tax department demanding sales tax on the auction sale of gold and other valuables pledged as security for loans. The banks argued that such sales were not "sales" within the meaning of the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, 1963 and that they did not

STATE BANK OF INDIAversusYASANGI VENKATESWARA RAO

1999 INSC 2021 January 1999Appeal(s) allowed

State Bank of India filed a suit for recovery of money against Y. Venkateswara Rao, obtaining a preliminary decree in its favour which was upheld by the District Court. After the decree, Section 21-A was inserted into the Banking Regulation Act, 1949 by the Banking Laws (Amendment) Act, 1984, prohibiting courts from re

CORPORATION BANKversusD.S. GOWDA AND ANR.

1994 INSC 22220 June 1994Disposed off

Corporation Bank advanced an overdraft facility to D.S. Gowda for construction of flats, later securing the debt by an equitable mortgage and charging interest at 16.5% per annum with quarterly rests. The borrower contested the rate as excessive and argued that the RBI circulars and the Mysore Usurious Loans Act barred

CANARA BANKversusN. G. SUBBARAYA SETTY & ANR.

2018 INSC 38520 April 2018Appeal(s) allowed

Canara Bank granted a loan to N.G. Subbaraya Setty, who signed an unregistered assignment deed transferring the trademark "Eenadu" to the bank as security. The bank later cancelled the deed, invoking the Banking Regulation Act, and both parties litigated in 2004 – the bank seeking to declare the deed void and the respo

HONGKONG AND SHANGHAI BANKING CORP. LTD.versusAWAZ & ORS.

2024 INSC 104419 December 2024Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court examined a consumer complaint filed by two trusts on behalf of credit‑card users alleging that banks were charging exorbitant interest rates of 36%‑49% p.a., which the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC) had deemed an unfair trade practice and capped at 30% p.a. The Court held that

COTTON CORPORATION OF INDIAversusUNITED INDUSTRIAL BANK

1983 INSC 12319 September 1983Appeal(s) allowed

The United Industrial Bank sued the Cotton Corporation of India seeking a declaration that the bank’s branch manager lacked authority to co‑accept usance bills and also obtained an interim injunction restraining the corporation from filing a winding‑up petition against the bank. The Bombay High Court’s Division Bench u

ITC LIMITEDversusBLUE COAST HOTELS LTD. & ORS.

2018 INSC 24119 March 2018Appeal(s) allowed

The case involved a dispute between ITC Limited, the auction purchaser of a five‑star hotel, and Blue Coast Hotels Ltd., the original borrower, under the SARFAESI Act. The borrower argued that the creditor (IFCI) violated s.13(3A) by not replying to its representation for loan rescheduling and that the inclusion of agr

B.O.I. FINANCE LIMITED ETC.versusTHE CUSTODIAN AND ORS. ETC.

1997 INSC 29219 March 1997Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant banks entered into ready‑forward (buy‑back) contracts with brokers before June 1992, consisting of a completed ready leg (purchase of securities) and a future forward leg. The Custodian, under the Special Court Act, claimed the contracts were void for violating RBI circulars issued under the Banking Regul

AMITABHA DASGUPTAversusUNITED BANK OF INDIA & ORS.

2021 INSC 10419 February 2021Disposed off

Amitabha Dasgupta, a locker holder, complained that United Bank of India had inadvertently broken open his locker despite his rental dues being cleared, and that only two of the seven ornaments he claimed to have deposited were returned. The District Consumer Forum found a deficiency of service and awarded compensation

TOTTEMPUDI SALALITHversusSTATE BANK OF INDIA & ORS.

2023 INSC 92318 October 2023Dismissed

The appellant, managing director of Totem Infrastructure Ltd., challenged the admission of a Section 7 Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC) application filed by State Bank of India (SBI) before the NCLT, arguing that the claim was barred by limitation and the doctrine of election. The banks had earlier obtained three r

K.I. SHEPHARD & ORS. ETC. ETC.versusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

1987 INSC 25518 September 1987Case Allowed

Three private banks were amalgamated with larger banks under schemes drawn pursuant to Section 45 of the Banking Regulation Act, 1949. A total of 125 employees were excluded from service and their contracts terminated without being named in the draft schemes or given a hearing. The excluded employees challenged the exc

BANK OF BARODA & ANRversusMBL INFRASTRUCTURES LIMITED & ORS.

2022 INSC 5318 January 2022Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined the scope of Section 29A(h) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, which bars persons who have executed an enforceable guarantee that has been invoked by a creditor from being a resolution applicant. The Court held that the disqualification arises when the guarantee is invoked, applies

VIVEK NARAYAN SHARMAversusUNION OF INDIA

2016 INSC 116116 December 2016Directions issued

The Supreme Court admitted a batch of writ petitions challenging the demonetisation notification of 8 November 2016 and issued interim directions. It examined the legality of the RBI's power to demonetise under the Reserve Bank of India Act and its compatibility with constitutional provisions. The Court considered the

RESERVE BANK OF INDIAversusJAYANTILAL N. MISTRY

2015 INSC 94216 December 2015Dismissed

The Supreme Court examined whether the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) could refuse to disclose information obtained from banks under the Right to Information (RTI) Act on the grounds of fiduciary relationship, economic interest, or commercial confidence. The Court held that RBI does not have a fiduciary relationship with

BANK OF RAJASTHAN LTD.versusCOMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

2024 INSC 78116 October 2024Appeal(s) allowed

The case concerned whether a scheduled bank could claim a tax deduction for the broken‑period interest paid when it purchased government securities that are classified as Held‑to‑Maturity (HTM). The bank argued that the securities are stock‑in‑trade, so the broken‑period interest is a revenue expense deductible under S

STATE OF M.P. AND OTHERSversusSANJAY NAGAYACH AND OTHERS

2013 INSC 34716 May 2013Dismissed

The Board of Directors of the District Cooperative Central Bank, Panna was superseded by the Joint Registrar of Co-operative Societies without prior consultation with the Reserve Bank of India, contrary to the second proviso of Section 53(1) of the Madhya Pradesh Co-operative Societies Act, 1960. The Board challenged t

INDIAN BANKS' ASSOCIATION, BOMBAY AND ORS.versusM/S. DEVKALA CONSULTANCY SERVICE AND ORS.

2004 INSC 27516 April 2004Dismissed

The Supreme Court examined whether banks could round up the rate of interest on loans to the next 0.25% under Section 26C of the Interest Tax Act, 1974, thereby increasing the tax burden on borrowers. The Court held that Section 26C is merely an enabling provision to allow banks to recover the tax on chargeable interes

JAYANT VERMA & ORS.versusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

2018 INSC 15916 February 2018Directions issued

The petition challenged the constitutional validity of Section 21A of the Banking Regulation Act, 1949, which bars courts from reopening bank loan transactions on the ground of excessive interest. The petitioners argued that the provision violated Article 14 and undermined State Debt Relief Acts that provide relief to

STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ORS.versusBRIJLAL SADASUKH MODANI

2015 INSC 104315 December 2015Appeal(s) allowed

The respondent, Brijlal Sadashuk Modani, was a senior employee of Osmanabad Janata Sahakari Bank Ltd., a multi‑state cooperative bank. While in service he received notices from the Anti‑Corruption Bureau demanding details of his assets, which he contested on the ground that the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (PCA)

M/S. DURGA HOTEL COMPLEXversusRESERVE BANK OF INDIA AND ORS.

2007 INSC 29615 March 2007Dismissed

M/s. Durga Hotel Complex obtained a loan of Rs.15 lakh from a bank, which later recalled part of the amount and denied an additional advance. The hotel filed a complaint with the Banking Ombudsman under Clause 16 of the Banking Ombudsman Scheme, 1995, alleging unauthorized withdrawals and non‑credit of proceeds. While

SHAKTI YEZDANI & ANR.versusJAYANAND JAYANT SALGAONKAR & ORS.

2023 INSC 107614 December 2023Dismissed

The testator, Jayant Shivram Salgaonkar, died leaving fixed deposits and mutual fund securities for which he had nominated certain family members under Section 109A of the Companies Act, 1956 and Bye‑law 9.11.1 of the Depositories Act, 1996. The nominees claimed that the nomination gave them absolute beneficial ownersh

KERALA STATE CO-OPERATIVE AGRICULTURAL AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT BANK LTD. KSCARDBversusTHE ASSESSING OFFICER, TRIVANDRUM AND ORS.

2023 INSC 83014 September 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The Kerala State Co‑operative Agricultural and Rural Development Bank Ltd. (KSCARDB) claimed a deduction under s.80P(2)(a)(i) of the Income Tax Act for profits earned by providing credit facilities to its member co‑operative societies. The Assessing Officer held that KSCARDB was a "co‑operative bank" within the meaning

STANDARD CHARTERED BANK LTD.versusDR. B.N. RAMAN

2006 INSC 43314 July 2006Case Partly allowed

Dr. B.N. Raman, a non‑resident Indian, deposited US$5,000 in a Foreign Currency Non‑Resident (FCNR) account with Standard Chartered Bank in August 1979, which was to mature in November 1984 and was later reinvested at higher rates. The bank later claimed the deposit was prematurely withdrawn in November 1979, a claim t

ALL INDIA STATE BANK OFFICERS FEDERATION AND ORS.versusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

1996 INSC 105213 September 1996Dismissed

The All India State Bank Officers Federation filed writ petitions under Article 32 challenging the State Bank of India's 7 March 1989 promotion policy for moving officers from Senior Management Grade Scale V to Top Executive Grade Scale VI. The petitioners argued that the policy was arbitrary for raising the minimum se

SHRIRAM CHITS AND INVESTMENT (P) LTD.versusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

1993 INSC 22213 July 1993Dismissed

The Supreme Court examined the constitutional validity of the Chit Funds Act, 1982, challenged by various chit fund companies and individuals on the grounds that it infringed their right to carry on business under Article 19(1)(g) and that Parliament lacked legislative competence, alleging the Act dealt with money‑lend

NEW BANK OF INDIA EMPLOYEES UNION AND ANR.versusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

1996 INSC 37613 March 1996Dismissed

The New Bank of India, a loss‑making nationalised bank, was merged with Punjab National Bank under the Banking Companies (Acquisition and Transfer of Undertakings) Act, 1980. The Central Government, in consultation with the Reserve Bank of India, framed a Placement Scheme to determine the inter‑se seniority of the tran

INDIAN BANKS ASSOCIATIONversusWORKMEN OF SYNDICATE BANK AND ORS.

2001 INSC 8513 February 2001Dismissed

The Indian Banks Association and several nationalised banks challenged an Industrial Tribunal award that classified deposit collectors and commission agents as workmen under the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, and ordered back wages, gratuity and other benefits. The banks argued that the collectors were engaged on a pur

RESERVE BANK OF INDIAversusGM, COOPE. BANK DEPOSIT AJC HR. SHA & ORS.

2010 INSC 50512 August 2010Appeal(s) allowed

The Reserve Bank of India appealed against two orders of the Gujarat High Court that, in a bail application under Section 439 of the CrPC, directed a cooperative bank to repay deposits of poor depositors (those with balances up to Rs 10,000) from funds recovered from accused persons. The bail had been granted to the ex

MAXOPP INVESTMENT LTD.versusCOMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, NEW DELHI

2018 INSC 13112 February 2018Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined whether interest expenditure incurred by Maxopp Investment Ltd. on shares held to acquire controlling interest, or held as stock‑in‑trade, could be deducted when the dividend income from those shares is exempt under Section 10. The Court held that the dominant‑purpose test is irrelevant; Sect

KOTAK MAHINDRA BANK LTD.versusHINDUSTAN NATIONAL GLASS & IND. LTD. AND ORS.

2012 INSC 58011 December 2012Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined whether the Reserve Bank of India's Master Circular on wilful default applies to defaults arising from derivative transactions or is limited to traditional lender‑borrower relationships. Kotak Mahindra Bank had classified Hindustan National Glass and other parties as wilful defaulters for non

S. GUIN & OTHERSversusGRINDLAYS BANK LTD.

1985 INSC 24911 December 1985Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants were charged under IPC s.341 (wrongful restraint) and Banking Regulation Act s.36AD for allegedly obstructing bank officers at a Grindlays Bank branch. The Metropolitan Magistrate acquitted them in 1978. Grindlays Bank appealed; after a six‑year delay, the Calcutta High Court set aside the acquittal and

RELIGARE FINVEST LIMITEDversusSTATE OF NCT OF DELHI & ANR.

2023 INSC 81911 September 2023Disposed off

Religare Finvest Ltd. sued the erstwhile Lakshmi Vilas Bank (LVB) for alleged misappropriation of fixed deposits used as security for loans, leading to a criminal complaint and FIR under IPC sections 409 and 120B. LVB was placed under moratorium by the RBI and subsequently amalgamated into DBS Bank India Ltd. under a s

SALIM AKBARALI NANJIversusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

2006 INSC 31611 May 2006Dismissed

The Development Credit Bank sought the Reserve Bank of India's (RBI) permission to write off Rs 120 crore of non‑performing assets (NPAs) from its reserves. The RBI approved the request, and a shareholder of the bank filed a writ petition alleging that the RBI acted ultra vires by not following the procedures prescribe

M. GOPALAKRISHNANversusSTATE BY ADDL. S.P. CBI, B.S. & F.C., BANGALORE

2009 INSC 14111 February 2009Dismissed

The CBI filed a case under Sections 120B and 420 of the IPC and Sections 11, 12 and 13 of the Prevention of Corruption Act against M. Gopalakrishnan, then Executive Director, Chairman and Managing Director of Indian Bank. Gopalakrishnan sought to quash the proceedings under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure

SUSHIL KUMAR SINGHALversusTHE REGIONAL MANAGER, PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK

2010 INSC 49310 August 2010Dismissed

The appellant, a peon of Punjab National Bank, was convicted under Section 409 IPC for embezzling Rs 5,000 and was dismissed from service. While his criminal appeal upheld the conviction, the appellate court released him on probation under the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958. The bank dismissed him under Section 10(1)

NEDUMPILLI FINANCE COMPANY LIMITEDversusSTATE OF KERALA & ORS.

2022 INSC 54510 May 2022Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined whether Non‑Banking Financial Companies (NBFCs) regulated under Chapter III‑B of the Reserve Bank of India Act, 1934 are also subject to the Kerala Money Lenders Act, 1958 and the Gujarat Money Lenders Act, 2011. The NBFCs argued that the RBI Act, especially after its 1997 amendment, constitu

CHITRA SHARMA AND ORS.versusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

2018 INSC 6819 August 2018Leave Granted & Disposed off

Jaypee Infratech Ltd (JIL) defaulted on a loan from IDBI Bank, prompting the bank to initiate a Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (IBC). Home buyers filed a writ petition alleging that the CIRP ignored their interests and sought a pro‑rata refund of the Rs 750

ASSOCIATED TIMBER INDUSTRIES AND ORS.versusCENTRAL BANK OF INDIA AND ANR.

2000 INSC 3909 August 2000Dismissed

The Central Bank of India sued Associated Timber Industries and others for recovery of a loan. The defendants contended that the suit was not maintainable because, under the Assam Money‑Lenders Act, 1934, a bank that advances loans is a "money‑lender" and must be registered, which the bank was not. The trial court dism

A. SREENIVASA REDDYversusRAKESH SHARMA AND ANR.

2023 INSC 6828 August 2023Dismissed

The appellant, an Assistant General Manager of State Bank of India, was accused of conspiracy to cheat the bank by sanctioning a large corporate loan and was charged under Sections 120‑B, 420, 468 and 471 of the IPC and under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. The bank initially declined, then later granted, sanct

THE CITIZEN CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LIMITED, THROUGH ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR, HYDERABADversusASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE~9(1), HYDERABAD

2017 INSC 7148 August 2017Dismissed

The Citizen Co-operative Society Ltd., a multi‑state cooperative credit society, claimed deduction under Section 80P(2)(a)(i) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The Assessing Officer, CIT(A) and ITAT held that the society’s activities amounted to a finance business involving "nominal members" and were not confined to its mem

ANDHRA BANKversusANDHRA BANK OFFICERS & ANR.

2008 INSC 6138 May 2008Case Allowed

Andhra Bank, a "new bank" under the Banking Companies (Acquisition and Transfer of Undertakings) Act, 1980, had a scheme (Regulation 26) that treated travel between an officer's residence and office as official, allowing reimbursement. In 1990 the Central Government issued a circular stating such travel should not be c

NOEL HARPER & ORS.versusUNION OF INDIA & ANR.

2022 INSC 4118 April 2022Disposed off

The petitioners, a group of NGOs and individuals, challenged the 2020 amendments to the Foreign Contribution (Regulation) Act, 2010, specifically sections 7, 12(1A), 12A and 17, alleging that the prohibition on transfer of foreign contributions, the requirement to open a single FCRA account with SBI, and the mandatory

ANILBHAI M. PATEL AND ORS.versusSURYAPUR BANK AGENT D.B.H. SAMITI AND ORS.

2007 INSC 2598 March 2007Disposed off

The appellants, directors of City Co‑operative Bank Ltd., challenged a Gujarat High Court interim order that appointed an Administrator in place of the elected board, alleging that no prayer for such relief was made and that the court had usurped the statutory role of the Registrar under the Gujarat Co‑operative Societ

BANK OF TRAVANCOREversusGOODLAND PLANTATIONS (P) LTD. N OVEMBE~ 7, 1979

1979 INSC 2317 November 1979Appeal(s) allowed

Goodland Plantations Ltd. subscribed to a monthly chitty run by Orient Bank and paid four instalments, winning the prize. Before the prize could be paid, the Central Government imposed a moratorium on Orient Bank under the Banking Regulation Act, 1949, causing the chitty to be deemed terminated under the Travancore Chi

SUDHIR SHANTILAL MEHTAversusC.B.I.

2009 INSC 10357 August 2009Disposed off

The case concerned the discounting and rediscounting of two bills of exchange by UCO Bank, allegedly to provide funds to stock‑broker Harshad Mehta for securities transactions. The Supreme Court examined whether the Special Court (Trial of Offences Relating to Transactions in Securities) Act, 1992 had jurisdiction over

R. VENKATAKRISHNANversusCENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION

2009 INSC 10377 August 2009Disposed off

The case concerned a massive "call money" scam in which Rs 40 crore of National Housing Bank funds were diverted to broker Harshad Mehta’s account through officials of UCO Bank and NHB. The appellants – senior officials of UCO Bank and NHB – were convicted by a Special Court under the Special Court (Trial of Offences R

BANK OF MAHARASHTRAversusPANDURANG KESHAV GORWARDKAR & ORS

2013 INSC 3177 May 2013Appeal(s) allowed

The Bank of Maharashtra obtained a recovery certificate against Paper and Pulp Conversions Ltd. and, through the Debt Recovery Tribunal (DRT), sold the company's movable assets, retaining a portion of the proceeds. The company was subsequently ordered to be wound up and an official liquidator was appointed. The workmen

RAM CHANDER TALWAR & ANR.versusDEVENDER KUMAR TALWAR & ORS.

2010 INSC 6776 October 2010Dismissed

The appellant, a nominee of a bank account held by his deceased mother, claimed exclusive rights over the deposit, arguing that Section 45ZA(2) of the Banking Regulation Act, 1949 made him the sole owner, thereby excluding his brother, the respondent. The Court examined the language of the provision, holding that it me

EVA AGRO FEEDS PRIVATE LIMITEDversusPUNJAB NATIONAL BANK AND ANR.

2023 INSC 8096 September 2023Appeal(s) allowed

Eva Agro Feeds Private Ltd bid the reserve price of Rs.10 crore for a corporate debtor's property in an e‑auction and was issued a certificate of winning on 20 July 2021. The liquidator cancelled the auction the next day under Clause 3(k) of the E‑Auction Process Information Document without giving any reasons, prompti

CHAIRMAN, CANARA BANK, BANGALOREversusM. S. JASRA AND ORS.

1992 INSC 656 March 1992Appeal(s) allowed

M.S. Jasra, a former RBI officer, joined Lakshmi Commercial Bank as Assistant General Manager in 1983. After Lakshmi was amalgamated with Canara Bank under Section 45 of the Banking Regulation Act, 1949, he was placed as Divisional Manager in Canara Bank. He claimed entitlement to a higher post and to retire at age 60,

THE GOA URBAN CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD.versusNOOR MOHD. SHEIKH MUSSA AND ANR.

2004 INSC 3915 July 2004Dismissed

The Goa Urban Co‑operative Bank leased a 47.04‑sq‑m portion of a building for the purpose of an "office" under a two‑year lease. In 1982 the bank shifted its branch office to another building and used the demised premises solely as a godown for storing records, without obtaining Reserve Bank of India permission to cont

PANDURANG GANPATI CHAUGULEversusVISHWASRAO PATIL MURGUD SAHAKARI BANK LIMITED

2020 INSC 3825 May 2020Reference answered

The Court examined whether co‑operative banks, which are societies registered under State legislation, fall within the Union List entry 45 (banking) or the State List entry 32 (co‑operative societies) for the purposes of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act,

ARCELORMITTAL INDIA PRIVATE LIMITEDversusSATISH KUMAR GUPTA & ORS.

2018 INSC 9354 October 2018Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined the eligibility of ArcelorMittal India Private Ltd (AMIPL) and Numetal Ltd to submit resolution plans for Essar Steel India Ltd (ESIL) under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC) after the introduction of Section 29A. The Court held that disqualification under sub‑clause (c) of Section 29A

GREATER BOMBAY CO-OP. BANK LTD.versusM/S UNITED YARN TEX. PVT. LTD. & ORS.

2007 INSC 3704 April 2007Reference answered

The Greater Bombay Co‑operative Bank Ltd. advanced loans to its member company United Yarn Tex Pvt. Ltd. and sought recovery of the dues under the Maharashtra Co‑operative Societies Act, 1960. The High Courts held that, after the establishment of the Debt Recovery Tribunal under the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and F

INTERNET AND MOBILE ASSOCIATION OF INDIAversusRESERVE BANK OF INDIA

2020 INSC 2644 March 2020Appeal(s) allowed

The Reserve Bank of India (RBI) issued a Statement and a Circular in April 2018 directing banks and other regulated entities to cease dealing with persons or entities dealing in virtual currencies (VCs) and to exit existing relationships within three months. The petitioners – a trade association and several cryptocurre

K.K. BASKARANversusSTATE REP. BY ITS SECRETARY, TAMIL NADU & ORS.

2011 INSC 1834 March 2011Dismissed

The petitioners challenged the constitutional validity of the Tamil Nadu Protection of Interests of Depositors (in Financial Establishments) Act, 1997 (as amended in 2003), arguing that it encroached upon Union legislative competence (entries 43‑45 of List I) and violated Articles 14, 19(1)(g) and 21 of the Constitutio

HARSHAD GOVARDHAN SONDAGARversusINTERNATIONAL ASSETS RECONSTRUCTION CO. LTD.

2014 INSC 9553 April 2014Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants, who were tenants of premises mortgaged to banks, challenged the seizure of those premises by the secured creditors under the SARFAESI Act. The Supreme Court examined whether a lease made by the mortgagor, either before or after the mortgage, remains valid and binding on the secured creditor, and whether

M/S. MUTHOOT LEASING AND FINANCE LIMITED AND ANOTHERversusCOMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

2023 INSC 53 January 2023Appeal(s) allowed

Muthoot Leasing and Finance Ltd and another, classified as credit institutions, challenged the levy of interest tax on the interest component embedded in hire‑purchase instalments under the Interest‑Tax Act, 1974. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) held that hire‑purchase agreements are composite transactions wit

SMALL INDUSTRIES DEVELOPMENT BANK OF INDIAversusM/S. SIBCO INVESTMENT PVT. LTD.

2022 INSC 33 January 2022Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined whether the Reserve Bank of India's (RBI) communication dated 9 June 1997 to SIDBI was a binding directive under the RBI Act, 1934 and the Banking Regulation Act, 1949, and whether SIDBI was justified in withholding interest on bonds issued by CRB Capital. The Court held that RBI’s directions

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(TDS) KANPUR AND ANR.versusCANARA BANK

2018 INSC 5632 July 2018Dismissed

Canara Bank paid interest on fixed deposits to the New Okhla Industrial Development Authority (NOIDA) without deducting tax at source under Section 194A of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The Assessing Officer treated the bank as a defaulter and issued a demand notice, which the bank appealed, relying on Notification dated 2

C.B.I. BANK SECURITIES & FRAUD CELLversusRAMESH GELLI & ORS.

2016 INSC 11802 May 2016Appeal(s) allowed

The CBI Bank Securities & Fraud Cell appealed against the Mumbai High Court’s judgment in criminal revision applications involving Ramesh Gelli and others. The appeal contested the accuracy of statutory citations in paragraph 25 of the High Court’s order, which incorrectly referred to Section 46 of the Banking Regulati

DHARANI SUGARS AND CHEMICALS LTD.versusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

2019 INSC 4572 April 2019Disposed off

The petitioners, led by Dharani Sugars and Chemicals Ltd., challenged the constitutional validity of the Banking Regulation (Amendment) Act, 2017 which introduced sections 35AA and 35AB, and contended that the RBI circular of 12‑02‑2018 directing banks and NBFCs to resolve stressed assets within six months was ultra vi

DISTT. REGISTRAR & COLLECTOR, HYDERABAD AND ANR.versusCANARA BANK ETC.

2004 INSC 6311 November 2004Dismissed

The Andhra Pradesh amendment of Section 73 of the Indian Stamp Act gave the Collector power to inspect, seize and impound any registers, books or documents, including those in banks, without any procedural safeguards. The High Court struck down this provision as unconstitutional, and the State appealed. The Supreme Cou

PUNJAB AND SIND BANKversusM/S. ALLIED BEVERAGE COMPANY PVT. LTD. AND ORS.

2010 INSC 6651 October 2010Dismissed

Punjab and Sino Bank had granted cash credit facilities to Allied Beverage Company, which later became a non‑performing asset. The bank recovered the dues through the Debts Recovery Tribunal, which awarded interest at 18% per annum with monthly rests. The High Court modified this order, reducing the pendente lite and f

M/S PRO KNITSversusTHE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF CANARA BANK & ORS.

2024 INSC 5651 August 2024Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants, MSME borrowers, challenged the classification of their loan accounts as non‑performing assets by Canara Bank and other banks, contending that the banks had violated the procedural framework prescribed in the Government’s 29 May 2015 Notification under Section 9 of the MSMED Act. The High Court had held

Search Indian case law

Ask in plain English, not just keywords. 25,000 AI words free, no card.

Search by issue, statute, judge or citationSign in to search