வங்கிகளில் வாராக்கடன் அதிகரிப்பு: சட்டங்களை கடுமையாக்க நிதியமைச்சகம் திட்டம்

 புதியதலைமுறை ஜூலை 31, 2014, 10:55:08 AM

வங்கிகளின் வாராக் கடன்கள் அதிகரித்து வரும்
நிலையில் கடன் வசூலிப்பு சட்டங்களை
கடுமையாக்க நிதியமைச்சகம் திட்டமிட்டுள்ளது.

இதன் ஒரு பகுதியாக கடன் வசூல் சட்டங்களில்
செய்யப்பட வேண்டிய மாற்றங்கள் குறித்த
பரிந்துரையை அளிக்க நிபுணர் குழு ஒன்று
அமைக்கப்பட்டுள்ளது. தற்போதைய கடன்
வசூல் சட்டங்களில் ஏமாற்றுவோர் தப்பிக்க
வழிகள் அதிகம் இருக்கும் நிலையில் இவற்றுக்கு
மாற்று வழிகளை நிபுணர் குழு கண்டறியும்.
நிறுவனம் நஷ்டத்தில் இயங்கினால்
அவற்றின் சொத்துக்களை பறிமுதல் செய்து
கடனை நேர் செய்யும் சர்ஃபாசி சட்டத்திலும்
இக்குழு திருத்தங்களை மேற்கொள்ளும்
எனத் தெரிகிறது. இந்தியாவில் 2 லட்சத்து
40 ஆயிரம் கோடி ரூபாய் வாராக் கடனாக
உள்ளது. கடனில் தத்தளிக்கும் நிறுவனங்கள்
பலவற்றின் உரிமையாளர்கள் செல்வச்
செழிப்பில் திளைப்பதும் ஆய்வுகளில் தெரியவந்துள்ளது.

Give copy of Rajesh Khanna's will to his former companion Anita Advani: Bombay High Court

31 July 2014 - 8:06pm IST | Place: Mumbai | Agency: PTI

The Bombay High Court has asked Twinkle Khanna, daughter of the late Bollywood superstar Rajesh Khanna, to give a copy of probate proceedings and the probated will of her father to his former companion Anita Advani.

Justice RD Dhanuka, who yesterday allowed Advani to secure a copy of the will, also declined to stay his order for enabling an appeal. The late actor's two daughters, Twinkle and Rinkie, who are his legal heirs, had earlier moved the High Court to get his will probated (validated). Twinkle is married to actor Akshay Kumar.

Advani, who claims to have lived in with Khanna at his iconic suburban bungalow Ashirwad during the last two years of his life and looked after him, has challenged genuineness of the will, saying that he was not in the position to sign it at the time due to ill-health. Advani, through her lawyer Manohar Shetty, has sought revocation of probate alleging that the will has been forged.

Senior counsel Janak Dwarkadas, who appeared for Twinkle, opposed Advani's plea seeking copy of the will, saying that she was neither a family member nor an heir.

However, the court held that no harm would be caused to Khanna's legal heirs if a copy was given to Advani. The heirs would get a fair chance to defend themselves before a decision is taken on Advani's plea against the probate, the judge said. Khanna, a yesteryear superstar, died on July 18, 2012.

The will names his daughters as the legal heirs; Twinkle has been also appointed as executor of the will. Some media reports had said recently that Khanna's bungalow had been sold off to a city-based businessman.

Advani's lawyer said she would be filing a petition before the High Court claiming a share in the late actor's estate, including the bungalow.

Cheque bounce – Stop payment – civil disputes – No offence in the absence of proof of hand loan

Cheque bounce – Stop payment – civil disputes – No offence in the absence of proof of hand loan – Hand loan – No calculations for arriving for total sum for which the cheque was issued – Non- enquiry about the sufficient funds in the account of accused – complainant is a worker – accused is a employee – suppression of actual deal – Trial court dismissed the case – High court reversed it – Apex court held that when the actual saving of complainant for annum is of Rs.10,000/- only and when is a worker under the complainant , it not believable that he gave hand loan about 4 years back to the employer by borrowing amount from Bank – in absence of rebuttal in cross examination of DW 2 mediator – clearly shows the cheque was stopped due to civil disputes = CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 1522 OF 2014 ARISING OUT OF SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CRL.) NO. 278 OF 2013 RAMDAS S/O KHELUNAIK … APPELLANT VERSUS KRISHNANAND S/O VISHNU NAIK … RESPONDENT = 2014 July. Part – http://judis.nic.in/supremecourt/filename=41784

ADVMMOHAN ⋅ AUGUST 2, 2014 ⋅ 

FILED UNDER  COMPLAINANT

Cheque bounce – Stop payment – civil disputes – No offence in the absence of proof of hand loan –  Hand loan – No calculations for arriving for total sum for which the cheque was issued – Non- enquiry about the sufficient funds in the account of accused – complainant is a worker – accused is a employee – suppression of actual deal – Trial court dismissed the case – High court reversed it – Apex court held that when the actual saving of complainant for annum is of Rs.10,000/- only and when is a worker under the complainant , it not believable that he gave hand loan about 4 years back to the employer by borrowing amount from Bank – in absence of rebuttal in cross examination  of DW 2  mediator – clearly shows the cheque was stopped due to civil disputes =

whereby the High

Court set aside the Judgment and Order of the J.M.F.C. (II-Court),

Karwar acquitting the appellant herein of the offence punishable

under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (for short

‘the Act’). =

The case of the complainant

was that he had given a hand loan of Rs.1,50,000/- to the accused-

appellant and three and half years thereafter he had again given

Rs.25,000/- as hand loan, thus in all, the accused-appellant owed him

Rs. 1,75,000/- and to discharge this liability the cheque for

Rs.5,00,000/- was drawn, but the same stood dishonoured at the

instructions of the accused-appellant. =

Cheque for Rs.5,00,000/- issued by the appellant in favour of the

respondent was dishonoured by the Bank when it was presented for

realization by the respondent, as the appellant had instructed the

Bank to stop the payment.

After receiving such information from the

Bank, the respondent served a legal notice calling upon the appellant

to pay the Cheque amount.

Upon failure of the respondent to obey

the legal notice warranting him to pay the Cheque amount of

Rs.5,00,000/-, the respondent filed Complaint Case against the

appellant for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Act=

Whereas, the case of the

appellant before the Trial Court was that he had entered into an

agreement with the complainant to purchase 3 acres of land

belonging to the complainant for a total consideration of

Rs.10,00,000/- and for that purpose, an advance of Rs.30,000/- in

cash was paid and the Cheque in question for Rs.5,00,000/- was

handed over to the complainant in presence of B.S. Pai (DW 2).

When the complainant failed to execute the sale agreement and not

even willing to return the advance amount of Rs.30,000/- and the

Cheque of Rs.5,00,000/-, he had to instruct the Bank to stop payment

against the said Cheque. =

Apex court held that

We find from the record that

admittedly, the accused appellant

deals with sale and purchase of landed properties and

the

respondent-complainant works as a Lorry Driver under him with a

salary of Rs.2,500/- p.m. and Rs.20/- per day towards miscellaneous

expenses (bhatta).

Admittedly, the Cheque in question was for

Rs.5,00,000/- and all the way the stand of the complainant was that

he had given a hand loan of Rs.1,75,000/- to the accused-appellant.

We find no material on record in support of the claim of the

complainant giving hand loan to the accused-appellant.

There was

also no calculation of account or stipulation of any interest on the

alleged loan amount to show as to how the amount of Rs.5,00,000/-

was figured, in return of a hand loan of Rs.1,75,000/-, if at all taken by

the appellant from the complainant.

It is also not on record whether

there was sufficient balance amount or not in the bank account of the

accused when the Cheque was dishonoured by the Bank.

The

complainant himself stated in the cross-examination that after the

Cheque was returned without payment, he has not made any enquiry

with the Bank as to whether sufficient funds were available or not in

the account of the accused.  

In the absence of any authenticated and

supporting evidence, we can not believe that the complainant-respondent

who is employed under the appellant -accused, has raised an amount of Rs.

1,75,000/- that too by obtaining loan of Rs.1,50,000/-  from Bank, only to give

a hand loan to his employer.

As the complaint himself admitted that his net savings

in a year comes to about  Rs.10,000/- ,it is not trustworthy that he was in a position to

extend hand loan of such big amount to the appellant

10. Whereas, the evidence of Mr. B.S. Pai (D.W. 2)

fully

corroborates the version of the appellant.

He deposed that the talks

of sale/purchase of 3 acres of land were held between the parties in

his presence.

The appellant agreed to purchase 3 acres of land

belonging to the complainant and the appellant had paid an amount

of Rs.30,000/- as advance and handed over a Cheque for

Rs.5,00,000/- .

It is also noteworthy that the complainant has not

rebutted the evidence of D.W. 2 in the cross examination. 

Further, the

firm and unshaken evidence of Mr. D.R. Bhat,

a member of the

Karwar Bar Association (D.W. 6) also corroborates the sale purchase

deal between the parties.

It is evident from the record that DW 6 has

clearly and categorically deposed that the appellant stated to him

about four years back that he had entered into an agreement with the

complainant in presence of B.S. Pai (DW 2) to purchase 3 acres of

land belonging to the complainant and also paid Rs.30,000/- in cash

as advance money and issued a Cheque for Rs.5,00,000/-.

Looking

at the corroborative evidence adduced by the defence witnesses and

more particularly, in the absence of any material evidence in support

of the claim of the respondent-complainant, we cannot uphold the

impugned judgment.

11. For all the aforesaid reasons, the appeal deserves to be

allowed and is accordingly allowed.

Bad Loans of PSU Banks Mounted Due to Economic Slow Down'

 PTI 01st August 2014 02:53 PM

• "NPAs have increased as the economy of the country has slowed down in the last two years," Jaitley said | File photo/PTI

NEW DELHI: Government today said non-performing assets (NPAs) of PSU banks have mounted due to economic slow down even as recovery increased to Rs 33,486 crore in 2014.

Finance Minister Arun Jaitley said bad loan amount in the last fiscal has mounted to Rs 2,45,809 crore from Rs 1,83,854 crore in 2012-13 and Rs 1,37,102 crore in 2011-12.

"NPAs have increased as the economy of the country has slowed down in the last two years," he said during Question Hour in Lok Sabha.

Jaitley said the total gross NPA ratio has gone up to 4.03 per cent in 2013-14 from 3.42 per cent in 2012-13 and 2.94 per cent in 2011-12.

India's economy has posted sub-five per cent growth for the last two consecutive financial years.

Jaitley said many industries have suffered losses in the last two years leading to their inability to repay the loans.

"Besides, there are many people whose intentions are not good. They do not want to repay the loans," he said.

The Finance Minister said the Reserve Bank of India has taken a number of steps to recover the bad loans of PSU banks that resulted in recovery of Rs 33,486 crore in 2014, Rs 19,832 crore in 2013 and Rs 17,272 crore in 2012.

Jaitley said RBI has taken a number of steps to recover the NPAs that include creation of a Central Repository of Information on Large Credits (CRILC) to collect, store and disseminate credit data to banks on credit exposures of Rs five crore and above, formation of Joint Lenders' Forum, Corrective Action Plan and sale of assets.

"RBI has issued instructions to the banks to review slippages in asset classification in the borrowal accounts with outstanding Rs five crore and above by the Board of Directors of the bank and review NPA accounts which have registered recoveries of Rs 1 crore and above. Further, Management Committee of Board should review top 100 borrowal accounts of below Rs five crore in each category of NPA," he said.

To a supplementary, the Finance Minister said bad loan amounts of PSU banks are much higher than that of private sector banks and there is no comparison between the two as their functioning is completely different.

Jaitley said private banks are circumspect whom to give loan and whom not to give while PSU banks have social commitment and cater to a large segment of population, particularly in rural areas.

"We cannot compare PSU banks with private banks. Their nature and functions are different," he said.

Jaitley said RBI guidelines on restructuring of advances by banks are divided into four categories - (i) guidelines on restructuring of advances extended to industrial units, (ii) guidelines on restructuring of advances extended to industrial units under corporate debt restructuring mechanism.

The other two are - (iii) guidelines on restructuring of advances extended to small and medium enterprises, and (iv) guidelines on restructuring of all other advances.

Jaitley said government has asked banks to be more focused in coordination with other members of consortium, assigning the responsibility at the executive director level, hiring best lawyers and monitoring their performance in defending bank's interest in Debt Recovery Tribunals and High Courts.

To a supplementary on the possibility of reducing lending rate of interest, the Finance Minister said the rate of interests are fixed by the RBI on the basis of various factors, including inflation.

Whenever inflation increases, the rate of interests of banks goes up and whenever the inflation comes down, the rate of interests also goes down, he said.

Contempt of Court : not think that this is a fit case:closed

Contempt of court – Giriraj Kishore 96 years- not in a position to respond to the query because of hearing impairment and feeble mental condition. – Apex court held that We are also not oblivious of the fact that the Court was not satisfied prima facie with the initial response filed by contemner No. 3, Giriraj Kishore and ordered on 06.05.1994 to initiate the contempt proceedings against respondent Nos. 1 to 3. But, the fact of the matter is that despite the order passed on 06.05.1994, the notice accompanied by charges on contemner No. 3 has not been served so far. In this view of the matter, at this distance of time, when the subject matter remained dormant for almost two decades and now contemner No.3 is 96 years and he is not able to respond to the charges due to old age and illness, we do not think that this is a fit case where we should deal with the matter further. – closed the contempt case = CONTEMPT PETITION (CRL.) NO. 2 OF 1994 Rajeev Dhawan …… Petitioner Vs. Gulshan Kumar Mahajan & Ors. …… Respondents = 2014 July. Part – http://judis.nic.in/supremecourt/filename=41785

 ADVMMOHAN ⋅ AUGUST 2, 2014 ⋅

FILED UNDER  CONTEMPT PROCEEDINGS, GIRIRAJ KISHORE, SUBJECT MATTER

Contempt of court –  Giriraj Kishore 96  years- not in a position to respond  to  the

query because of hearing impairment and feeble mental condition. – Apex court held that We are also not oblivious of the  fact  that  the  Court was not satisfied prima facie with the initial response filed  by  contemner No. 3, Giriraj Kishore and ordered on 06.05.1994 to  initiate  the  contempt proceedings against respondent Nos. 1 to 3.  But, the fact of the matter  is that despite the order passed  on  06.05.1994,  the  notice  accompanied  by charges on contemner No. 3 has not been served so far.  In this view of  the matter, at this distance of time, when the subject matter  remained  dormant for almost two decades and now contemner No.3 is 96  years  and  he  is  not able to respond to the charges due to old age and illness, we do  not  think that this is a fit case where we should deal with the matter further.  – closed the contempt case =

On 26.03.2014, contemner No.3, Giriraj Kishore was  brought

to the Court on wheel chair by his attendant.

Learned  senior  counsel  for

the  contemner  No.3  reiterated  that  notice   for   personal   appearance

accompanied by charges as directed by the Court on 06.05.1994 has  not  been

served on the contemner.

He also submitted that contemner No.3 is 96  years

and is not able to respond due to severe physical and mental  illness.

The

attendant accompanying contemner No.3, Giriraj Kishore, on the query of  the

Court, informed that contemner No.3 is not in a position to respond  to  the

query because of hearing impairment and feeble mental condition.

11.         One thing is clear from the record that the notice for  personal

appearance accompanied by charges as directed by this  Court  in  the  order

dated 06.05.1994, after cognizance of  contempt  was  taken,  has  not  been

served on contemner No.3 so far.

In a situation such as this, the  question

that arises immediately for our consideration is, whether the  Court  should

direct the service of notice accompanied by charges now.

Dr. Rajeev  Dhawan

vehemently contended that the backdrop to these cases is the destruction  of

the Babri Masjid on 06.12.1992.  According to  him,  this  had  resulted  in

injury to the secular fabric of India.

He submitted that tension  persisted

as the Vishwa Hindu Parishad held a Sansad on 03-04.04.1994  while  hearings

were taking place before this Court.

Contemner  No.  3  made  contemptuous

statements about the Court at that  time  and,  therefore,  matter  of  this

gravity should not be left undecided.

12.         We appreciate the gravity of the subject matter  highlighted  by

Dr. Rajeev Dhawan.

We are also not oblivious of the  fact  that  the  Court

was not satisfied prima facie with the initial response filed  by  contemner

No. 3, Giriraj Kishore and ordered on 06.05.1994 to  initiate  the  contempt

proceedings against respondent Nos. 1 to 3.

But, the fact of the matter  is

that despite the order passed  on  06.05.1994,  the  notice  accompanied  by

charges on contemner No. 3 has not been served so far.  

In this view of  the

matter, at this distance of time, when the subject matter  remained  dormant

for almost two decades and now contemner No.3 is 96  years  and  he  is  not

able to respond to the charges due to old age and illness, we do  not  think

that this is a fit case where we should deal with the matter further.

Now,

since contempt proceedings  are  not  being  pursued  further  to  find  out

criminality against the author  (contemner  No.3)  who  made  the  offending

statements, we are of the view that contempt matter does not deserve  to  be

pursued as against contemner Nos. 1 and 2 as well.

The contemner Nos.1  and

2 have also tendered unconditional apology.   Insofar as contemner Nos.4  to

6 are concerned,  the  Court  has  not  yet  taken  cognizance  of  criminal

complaint against them.

In what has been said above, we think the  contempt

matters deserve to be closed.  We order accordingly.