Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Reserve Bank of India Act, 1934

61 judgments · newest first · showing 1–61

VINOD KUMARversusSTATE OF U.P.

Vinod Kumar, an accused in a large economic‑offence case involving alleged fraud under the Companies Act, RBI Act, Prize Chits Act and several IPC sections, has been in judicial custody since June 2019. The charge sheet has not yet been framed due to the non‑appearance of numerous co‑accused lodged …

PRAGYA PRASUN & ORS.versusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

2025 INSC 599Disposed off

The petitioners, including acid‑attack survivors with facial disfigurements and a blind individual, challenged the mandatory digital KYC/e‑KYC/video‑KYC procedures for being inaccessible and discriminatory. They argued that requirements such as capturing a live photograph and performing a liveness …

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

2024 INSC 1044Appeal(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. …

ASSOCIATION FOR DEMOCRATIC REFORMS & ANR.versusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

2024 INSC 113

The Supreme Court of India struck down the Electoral Bond Scheme and related amendments to the Finance Act 2017, which had introduced anonymous financial contributions to political parties. The Court held that the scheme violated the right to information of voters under Article 19(1)(a) of the …

STATE BANK OF INDIA & ORSversusRAJESH AGARWAL & ORS

2023 INSC 303Disposed 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, …

VIVEK NARAYAN SHARMAversusUNION OF INDIA

2023 INSC 2

The Supreme Court, by a 4:1 majority, upheld the constitutional validity of the Central Government's notification dated 8th November 2016 demonetising all series of Rs.500 and Rs.1,000 bank notes under Section 26(2) of the Reserve Bank of India Act, 1934. The majority held that the word 'any' in …

HDFC BANK LTD. & ORSversusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

2022 INSC 1056Dismissed

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 …

NEDUMPILLI FINANCE COMPANY LIMITEDversusSTATE OF KERALA & ORS.

2022 INSC 545Disposed 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 …

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

2022 INSC 3Disposed 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 …

AKSHAY N PATELversusRESERVE BANK OF INDIA & ANR.

2021 INSC 828Dismissed

The appellant, a managing director of a pharmaceutical firm, sought to execute an international Merchanting Trade Transaction (MTT) for PPE products, but the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) denied permission under Clause 2(iii) of the 2020 MTT Guidelines because the Indian government had banned PPE …

SEPCO ELECTRIC POWER CONSTRUCTION CORPORATIONversusPOWER MECH PROJECTS LTD.

2021 INSC 417

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 …

ASSOCIATION FOR DEMOCRATIC REFORMS & ANR.versusUNION OF INDIA & ORS

2021 INSC 222Dismissed

The Association for Democratic Reforms and Common Cause filed two interlocutory applications seeking a stay on the sale of electoral bonds under the Electoral Bond Scheme, 2018, alleging that the scheme permits donor anonymity and violates transparency in political funding. The Court examined the …

PANDURANG GANPATI CHAUGULEversusVISHWASRAO PATIL MURGUD SAHAKARI BANK LIMITED

2020 INSC 382Reference 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 …

INTERNET AND MOBILE ASSOCIATION OF INDIAversusRESERVE BANK OF INDIA

2020 INSC 264Appeal(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 …

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

2019 INSC 457Disposed 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 …

M. D. FROZEN FOODS EXPORTS PVT. LTD. & ORS.versusHERO FINCORP LTD.

2017 INSC 976Dismissed

The appellants borrowed money from the respondent, securing the loan with seven immovable properties. Their loan account was declared a non‑performing asset and the parties’ contract contained an arbitration clause, leading the respondent to initiate arbitration while also issuing notices under …

VIVEK NARAYAN SHARMAversusUNION OF INDIA

2016 INSC 1161Directions 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 …

RESERVE BANK OF INDIAversusJAYANTILAL N. MISTRY

2015 INSC 942Dismissed

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 …

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

2015 INSC 72

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 …

SUBRATA CHATTORAJversusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

2014 INSC 392Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined petitions seeking to shift investigation of the multi‑state chit‑fund (Ponzi) scam, which defrauded lakhs of depositors of roughly Rs 10,000 crore, from the State Police to the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI). The scam involved companies operating across West Bengal, …

M/S. INTEGRATED FINANCE CO. LTD.versusRESERVE BANK OF INDIA ETC. ETC.

2013 INSC 472Dismissed

Integrated Finance Co. Ltd., a non‑banking financial company, was inspected by the RBI which found multiple violations and issued a circular prohibiting it from accepting deposits. The company, facing profitability problems, proposed a scheme of compromise under Section 391 of the Companies Act to …

STATE OF M.P. AND OTHERSversusSANJAY NAGAYACH AND OTHERS

2013 INSC 347Dismissed

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. …

M/S. P.G.F. LIMITED & ORS.versusUNION OF INDIA & ANOTHER

2013 INSC 155Dismissed

PGF Limited, which sold and developed agricultural land and ran joint‑venture schemes, was directed by SEBI to cease collecting money and to refund investors, on the ground that its activities constituted a collective investment scheme (CIS) under Section 11AA of the SEBI Act. PGF challenged the …

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

2012 INSC 580Disposed 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 …

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

2012 INSC 430Dismissed

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 …

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

2011 INSC 183Dismissed

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 …

ASSOCIATION OF LEASING AND FINANCIAL SERVICE COMPANIESversusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

2010 INSC 733Dismissed

The Association of Leasing and Financial Service Companies challenged the levy of service tax under Section 66 of the Finance Act, 1994 (as amended) on financial leasing, equipment leasing and hire‑purchase services, arguing that Parliament lacked competence under Entry 97 of List I because Article …

MIS. SOUTHERN TECHNOLOGIES LTD.versusJOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, COIMBATORE

2010 INSC 28Dismissed

The case concerned whether a Non‑Banking Financial Company (NBFC) could treat the "Provision for NPA" debited to its profit‑and‑loss account, as required by RBI Directions 1998, as income under s.2(24) of the Income Tax Act or claim a deduction under s.36(1)(vii). The Supreme Court held that the RBI …

SUDHIR SHANTILAL MEHTAversusC.B.I.

2009 INSC 1035Disposed 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 …

R. VENKATAKRISHNANversusCENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION

2009 INSC 1037Disposed 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 …

RESERVE BANK OF INDIA & ANR.versusSTATE REP. BY M.R. BHAVSAR, BOMBAY

2008 INSC 1109Appeal(s) allowed

The Labour Enforcement Officer issued a show‑cause notice under Section 7 of the Contract Labour (Regulation and Abolition) Act, 1970, alleging that the Reserve Bank of India’s College of Agricultural Banking had violated the Act. The principal of the college filed an application to quash the …

KURIACHAN CHACKO & ORS.versusSTATE OF KERALA

2008 INSC 795Dismissed

The appellants, partners of a firm selling lotteries and magazines, floated a scheme promising investors a double return after the enrolment of 14 additional members. The police charged them under the Prize Chits & Money Circulation Scheme (Banning) Act, 1978 (sections 2(c), 3, 4, 5), the Reserve …

ANDHRA BANKversusANDHRA BANK OFFICERS & ANR.

2008 INSC 613Case 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 …

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

2007 INSC 370Reference 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 …

GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AND ANR.versusCORPORATION BANK

2007 INSC 349Disposed off

The Government of Andhra Pradesh issued a demand notice under Section 5 of the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1957 for tax on the turnover of an auction sale of jewellery held on 19‑08‑1987 by Corporation Bank, invoking Explanation IV to Section 2(1)(e) inserted by Act No. 27 of 1996. The …

SARASWAT CO-OP. BANK LTD. AND ANR.versusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ORS.

2006 INSC 513Dismissed

The Supreme Court examined several civil appeals and a writ petition challenging Section 3(1)(b) of the Maharashtra Rent Control Act, 1999, which exempts premises let to government, banks, public sector undertakings, foreign missions, multinational companies and private/public limited companies with …

RESERVE BANK OF INDIA AND ANR.versusCECIL DENNIS SOLOMON AND ANR.

2003 INSC 688Appeal(s) allowed

The respondents, who were employees of the Reserve Bank of India, resigned in 1988 before the RBI Pension Regulations, 1990 came into force. The Pension Regulations, particularly Regulation 18, state that resignation results in forfeiture of service and disqualification for pension. The High Court …

PURE HELIUM INDIA PVT. LTD.versusOIL AND NATURAL GAS COMMISSION

2003 INSC 538Appeal(s) allowed

Pure Helium India Ltd. won the lowest bid to supply helium gas to ONGC, quoting a composite price of Rs.149 per cubic meter that included a US$4.60 foreign‑exchange component. When the dollar appreciated, Pure Helium claimed compensation for the exchange‑rate difference, and a three‑member arbitral …

FEDERAL BANK LTD.versusSAGAR THOMAS AND OTHERS

2003 INSC 515Appeal(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 …

BHAVESH D. PARISH AND ORS.versusUNION OF INDIA AND ANR.

2000 INSC 325Dismissed

The petitioners, shroffs who operated as unincorporated firms providing credit and accepting public deposits, challenged the constitutionality of Section 45‑S of the Reserve Bank of India Act (as amended in 1997) which prohibits such entities from accepting deposits. They argued that the provision …

VIMAL CHANDRA GROVERversusBANK OF INDIA

2000 INSC 254Appeal(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 …

JYANTILAL RATANCHAND SHAHversusRESERVE BANK OF INDIA AND ORS

1996 INSC 859Dismissed

The petitioners, a charitable society and a trust, challenged the High Denomination Bank Notes (Demonetisation) Act, 1978, claiming that the Act extinguished their property rights in high‑denomination notes without compensation, violated Articles 19(1)(f), 19(1)(g) and 31(2) of the Constitution, …

EMPLOYERS IN RELATION TO THE MANAGEMENT OF RESERVE BANK OF INDIAversusTHEIR WORKMEN

1996 INSC 327Appeal(s) allowed

The Reserve Bank of India (RBI) provided canteen facilities for its Class III and IV employees through three arrangements – an Implementation Committee, co‑operative societies and contractors – but had no statutory duty to run these canteens. The Central Government Industrial Tribunal held that 166 …

CORPORATION BANKversusD.S. GOWDA AND ANR.

1994 INSC 222Disposed 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 …

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

1993 INSC 222Dismissed

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 …

T. VELAYUDHAN ACHARI AND ANR.versusUNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS

1993 INSC 46Dismissed

The Supreme Court examined the constitutional validity of Chapter III‑C of the Reserve Bank of India Act, 1934 (Section 45S and Section 58B(5A)) introduced by the Banking Laws (Amendment) Act, 1983, which limit the number of depositors an individual, firm or unincorporated association may accept and …

PEERLESS GENERAL FINANCE AND INVESTMENT CO. LTD. AND ANRversusRESERVE BANK OF INDIA

1992 INSC 32Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined the constitutional validity of the Reserve Bank of India's 1987 directions regulating Residuary Non‑Banking Companies (RNBCs) under Sections 45J, 45K(3) and 45L of the RBI Act. The petitioners, a group of finance companies including Peerless, argued that the directions …

MITHLESH KUMARI AND ANR.versusFATEH BAHADUR SINGH AND ANR.

1991 INSC 66Disposed off

The plaintiff, Fateh Bahadur Singh, sued Jang Bahadur (the second respondent) and two non‑tenure‑holders, Kalawati and Mithlesh Kumari, for specific performance of a sale agreement for a plot of land. The lower courts held that the plaintiff was entitled to specific performance, treating the sales …

BANK OF INDIAversusT.S. KELAWALA AND ORS.

1990 INSC 192Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court considered two appeals involving Bank of India and a private company concerning wage deductions during industrial actions. In the first appeal, employees participated in a four‑hour strike covering crucial banking hours; the Bank had issued a circular stating that participants …

DELHI CLOTH AND GENERAL MILLS ETC.versusUNION OF INDIA ETC.

1983 INSC 79Dismissed

The petitioners, a group of companies, challenged the constitutional validity of Section 58A of the Companies Act, 1956 and Rule 3A of the Companies (Acceptance of Deposits) Rules, 1975, arguing that the mandatory 10% liquid asset requirement for deposits maturing in a year violated Articles 14 and …

V.T. KHANZODE & ORS.versusRESERVE BANK OF INDIA & ANR.

1982 INSC 31Dismissed

The case concerned a challenge by 25 Group I officers of the Reserve Bank of India to an Administrative Circular (No. 8, 7 January 1978) and an Office Order (No. 679, 27 April 1978) that introduced a combined seniority list and inter‑group mobility for officers across Groups I, II and III, with …

STATE OF WEST BENGAL & ORS.versusSWAPAN KUMAR GUHA & ORS.

1982 INSC 13Dismissed

The Supreme Court examined whether the FIR lodged against Sanchaita Investments and its partners disclosed a cognizable offence under the Prize Chits and Money Circulation Schemes (Banning) Act, 1978. The firm accepted public deposits at a nominal 12% interest but paid excess interest of up to 48% …

SRINIVASA ENTERPRISES & ORS.versusUNION OF INDIA ETC.

1980 INSC 189Dismissed

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 …