Delhi High Court rejects plea against court Summer Vacation

The Hindu ;  PTI : Wednesday :3 july 2013

The Delhi High Court on Wednesday dismissed a PIL seeking discontinuation of its summer vacation, saying that “most judges spend substantial part of vacation time in writing the judgments at their offices.”

The order was passed by a bench of Acting Chief Justice B.D. Ahmed and Justice Vibhu Bakhru, which turned down the PIL filed by Prakash India, a registered society, also seeking quashing of the 2013 circular which notified the vacation period from June 1 to 30.

The bench observed that the petitioner does not seems to be aware that how the Delhi High Court is working and said, “Most of the judges spend substantial part of vacation time in writing the judgments at their offices.”

The bench rejected the petitioner’s suggestion that either the judges should avail the vacation on rotation basis like the police officers or the high court should curtail the number of vacation days to 10 or 15 instead of 30 days.

“Unfortunately other organisations cannot be compared with court system. It is not practically feasible nor advisable to work in rotation. It might become absolutely chaotic. We don’t see any merit in this case and dismiss (it),” the bench said, adding that this high court has been maintaining 210 working days as per the central government communication.

Appearing in person, petitioner Suraj Prakash Manchanda, a retired bank officer, argued that there is huge pendency of cases across the country including over 60,000 in the Delhi High Court and the judges and lawyers should not go on vacation as litigants suffer.

“...In such circumstance, the judges and advocates who have sworn to uphold the rule of law and Constitution of India cannot afford to go on long vacations. This affects the sacred objective of rendering social justice to one and all in the country,” the plea said.

Keywords: court vacation, judiciary, vacation period, PIL, Delhi High Court

பயணியின், "லக்கேஜை' தொலைத்த விமான நிறுவனம் நஷ்ட ஈடு தர உத்தரவு

தினமலர் :புதுடில்லி:   ஜூலை 02,2013

இந்தியன் ஏர்லைன்ஸ் விமானத்தில் பயணித்த, பயணியின், "லக்கேஜ்' காணாமல் போனதால், அவருக்கு, 75 ஆயிரம் ரூபாய் நஷ்டஈடு வழங்கும்படி, டில்லி நுகர்வோர் கோர்ட் உத்தரவிட்டுள்ளது.

டில்லியை சேர்ந்தவர், நிசார் அகமது. இவர், 2006ல், இந்தியன் ஏர்லைன்ஸ் விமானத்தில், டில்லியிலிருந்து பாங்காக் சென்றார். பாங்காக் விமான நிலையத்தில் இறங்கிய போது, விமானத்தில் வைக்கப்பட்டிருந்த, அகமதின், லக்கேஜ் காணாமல் போனது. அதில், திருமணத்திற்கு தேவையான, விலை உயர்ந்த பொருட்கள் இருந்தன. 

இதுபற்றி, விமான நிறுவன அதிகாரிகளிடம், அகமது புகார் செய்தார். ஆனாலும், உரிய நடவடிக்கை எடுக்கப்படவில்லை. இதனால், அதிருப்தி அடைந்த அகமது, டில்லி தென்மேற்கு மாவட்ட நுகர்வோர் கோர்ட்டில், வழக்குத் தொடர்ந்தார். வழக்கை விசாரித்த கோர்ட், "அகமதின் லக்கேஜை தொலைத்த குற்றத்திற்காக, 40 ஆயிரம் ரூபாய், காணாமல் போன உடைமைகளுக்கு நஷ்ட ஈடாக, 35 ஆயிரம் ரூபாய் என, மொத்தம், 75 ஆயிரம் ரூபாயை, நஷ்டஈடாக, இந்தியன் ஏர்லைன்ஸ் நிறுவனம் வழங்க வேண்டும்' என, உத்தரவிட்டது.

கோர்ட்டுகள் அரசின் எதிரி என கூறுவது தவறு: நீதிபதி சதாசிவம்

தினமலர் :2 july 2013

புதுடில்லி : கோர்ட்டுகள் அரசின் எதிரி என கூறுவது தவறானது என சுப்ரீம் கோர்ட் தலைமை நீதிபதியாக நியமிக்கப்பட்டுள்ள நீதிபதி சதாசிவம் தெரிவித்துள்ளார். நீதித்துறை, சட்டமன்றங்கள் மற்றும் அரசு நிர்வாகம் ஆகியவற்றிற்கு இடையேயான உறவு எதிரானது அல்ல எனவும், இவை மூன்றும் அரசியலமைப்பின் 3 அங்கங்களாக ஒன்றினைத் தொடர்ந்து மற்றொன்று இயங்கி வருவதாகவும் அவர் தெரிவித்துள்ளார்.

தமிழகத்தைச் சேர்ந்த நீதிபதி சதாசிவம், சுப்ரீம் கோர்ட் தலைமை நீதிபதியாக கடந்த வாரம் நியமிக்கப்பட்டார். ஜூலை 19ம் தேதியன்று தலைமை நீதிபதியாக பதவியேற்க உள்ள நிலையில் செய்தியாளர்களுக்கு அளித்த பேட்டியில், நீதித்துறைக்கு எதிராக கூறப்பட்டு வரும் கருத்துக்கள் குறித்து பேசினார். அப்போது அவர் கூறியதாவது : நீதித்துறை ஊழல்களுக்கு அப்பாற்பட்டது என நான் கூறவில்லை; அதே சமயம் மற்ற துறைகளுடன் ஒப்பிடுகையில் நீதித்துறையில் குறைவாகவே உள்ளது; அவை மிகவும் அரிதாக நடக்கக் கூடிய செயல்கள்; அவை சரிசெய்யப்பட்டு வருகின்றன; நீதித்துறை உறுப்பினர்கள் மீது ஊழல் புகார்கள் வரும் பட்சத்தில் உரிய நடவடிக்கை எடுக்கப்படும்; அவ்வாறு நிரூபிக்கப்படும் குற்றங்களுக்கு ஐகோர்ட் தலைமை நீதிபதிகளால் நடவடிக்கை எடுக்கப்படும்; ஒவ்வ‌ொரு ஐகோர்ட்டிலும் லஞ்ச ஒழிப்பு துறை அதிகாரிகள் செயல்பட்டு வருகின்றனர்; அரசின் நிர்வாக நடவடிக்கைகளில் கோர்ட்டோ அல்லது நீதிபதியோ தலையிட முடியாது; அதே போல் கோர்ட் செயல்பாடுகளை அரசால் தடுக்கவோ, தலையிடவோ முடியாது; இருப்பினும் தேவைப்படும் பட்சத்தில் அரசின் செல்பாடுகள் குறித்து கோர்ட் தனது கருத்தை கூற வேண்டிய நிலை ஏற்படுகிறது; தேவையற்ற சமயத்தில் கோர்ட் அரசு குறித்து கருத்து தெரிவிக்காது; கோர்ட்கள் அரசின் எதிரி என கூறப்படுவது தவறு; எங்களின் கடமையை தான் நாங்கள் செய்கிறோம்.இவ்வாறு சதாசிவம் தெரிவித்துள்ளார்.

நீதித்துறை கவுன்சிலின் வழிகாட்டுதல் சரியானதாக, தேவையானதாக இருந்தால் மட்டுமே அதனை நீதிபதி ஏற்க முடியும்; மற்றபடி நீதித்துறை கவுன்சிலின் முடிவு நீதிபதியின் முடிவாக இருக்காது; பார்லிமென்ட் அதிகாரத்தில் இருக்கும் போது மாநிலங்களின் ஒரு குறிப்பிட்ட விவகாரம் அல்லது அது தொடர்பாக விவகாரத்தில் கோர்ட் தலையிட முடியும்; பார்லிமென்ட் அதிகாரத்தில் இல்லாத சமயத்தில் கோர்ட் வழிகாட்ட முடியும்; ஊழல் வழக்குகளை பொருத்த வரை கடந்த 5 ஆண்டுகளில் அவற்றின் விசாரணை துரிதப்படுத்தப்பட்டு வருகிறது; அது குறித்து அரசு நடவடிக்கை மற்றும் விளக்கம் அளிக்க போதி அவகாசம் அளிக்கப்படும்; அது குறித்து கோர்ட், வரையரைக்கு உட்பட்டு உத்தரவு பிறப்பிக்க முடியும்; பின்னர் அவ்வழக்குகள் விசாரணை கோர்ட்டின் நடத்தப்பட்டு, பின்னர் ஐகோர்ட் வசமும், இறுதியாக சுப்ரீம் கோர்ட்டிற்கும் கொண்டு செல்லப்படும் இந்த முறைகள் தீவிரமாக கடைபிடிக்கப்பட்டு வருகிறது; குற்றத்தின் அடிப்படையிலேயே ஜாமின் அளிப்பதும், மறுக்கப்படுவதும் முடிவு செய்யப்படுகிறது; தகவல் அறியும் உரிமை சட்டத்தின் கீழ் அனைத்து விபரங்களையும் அளிப்பது தவறு அல்ல; அது நீதித்துறையின் ஒரு பிரிவு ஆகும். இவ்வாறு நீதிபதி சதாசிவம் தனது பேட்டியில் தெரிவித்துள்ளார். 

Justice Sathasivam first judge from Tamil Nadu to become CJI

Chief Justice of India-designate P. Sathasivam in New Delhi on Saturday. Photo: V. Sudershan

J Venkatesan : New delhi: 29 June 2013

He will be sworn in on July 19 as 40th CJI

President Pranab Mukherjee on Saturday appointed Justice P. Sathasivam, seniormost judge of the Supreme Court, the 40th Chief Justice of India.

He succeeds Altamas Kabir, who retires on July 18, and will have a brief tenure of about nine months.

Justice Sathasivam, 64, is the first judge from Tamil Nadu to become the CJI. Justice M. Patanjali Sastri, who served as CJI from November 1951 to January 1954, represented the undivided Madras Presidency.

Justice Sathasivam never served as Chief Justice of a High Court as he was elevated directly to the Supreme Court on August 21, 2007, when he was serving as a judge of the Punjab and Haryana High Court.

Hailing from Kadappanallur village, Bhavani taluk in Erode district of Tamil Nadu, Justice Sathasivam belonged to an agricultural family. He was the first graduate in his family and the first law graduate in his village. He was appointed a permanent judge of the Madras High Court on January 8, 1996. As a High Court judge, though he handled all types of cases, he disposed of more cases in service, labour and accident claim matters. On April 20, 2007, he was transferred to the Punjab and Haryana High Court.

He will be sworn in as CJI on July 19, 2013. He is due to retire on April 26, 2014.

As a Supreme Court judge, Justice Sathasivam has delivered some landmark judgments on matters of national importance which include Reliance Natural Resources Ltd. vs. Reliance Industries Limited wherein he emphasised the use of natural resources through public sector undertakings. He observed that “in a national democracy like ours, the national assets belong to the people” and “the government owns such assets for the purposes of developing them in the interests of the people.”

In Rabindra Kumar Pal alias Dara Singh vs. Union of India case, he dealt with the triple murder case of Australian Christian missionary Graham Stuart Staines and his two minor sons. This judgment concluded with the hope that Mahatma Gandhi’s vision of religion playing a positive role in bringing India’s numerous religions and communities into an integrated prosperous nation be realised by way of equal respect for all religions.

In another valiant pronouncement in Md. Khalil Chisti vs. State of Rajasthan, he set aside the Pakistani national’s conviction under Section 302 IPC and allowed him to go back to his native country.

In the Mayawati vs. Union of India case, he held that the Central Bureau of Investigation exceeded its jurisdiction in lodging FIR of disproportionate assets against Mayawati in the Taj Corridor matter and the same was quashed as being illegal.

In a number of judgments, he cautioned the courts against awarding lesser sentence in crimes against women and children and showing undue sympathy towards the accused by altering the sentence to the extent of period already undergone.

In the Mumbai blasts case, Justice Sathasivam convicted Bollywood actor Sanjay Dutt to five years’ imprisonment under the Arms Act and he was asked to serve out the remaining sentence.

As executive chairman, National Legal Services Authority, he visited several States and created awareness on people’s rights and entitlement. He inaugurated several legal literacy camps in rural areas, schools and colleges.

Keywords: P. Sathasivam, Chief Justice of India appointment, Altamas Kabir

Fresh loan recoveries from Kingfisher set to start

The lenders collected Rs.550-600 crore in the first phase by selling pledged shares of associate companies of Kingfisher Airlines’s parent UB Group. Photo: Mint

P R sanjai Anup Rai : Live Mint :Tue, Jun 25 2013. 11 31 PM IST
A group of 14 lenders led by SBI expects to recover at least Rs.1,000 cr from the grounded airline

Mumbai: The second phase of recovering loans from Kingfisher Airlines Ltd will begin early next month, according to two bankers familiar with the plan.

A group of 14 lenders led by State Bank of India (SBI) expects to recover at least Rs.1,000 crore as it starts taking possession of buildings, helicopters and other fixed assets of the grounded airline, the bankers said, both declining to be identified.

The lenders collected Rs.550-600 crore in the first phase by selling pledged shares of associate companies of Kingfisher Airlines’s parent UB Group.

Kingfisher’s operating licence was suspended in October by the Directorate General of Civil Aviation following a strike by the airline’s employees.

The permit has since expired, although it can be renewed within two years.

“We have already filed a claim on 3 May under the Sarfaesi (Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest) Act to recover dues,” said an SBI executive, one of the two bankers mentioned above. “Under the claim, we have to give 60 days notice to airline and it will expire on 1 July.”

The banks will start taking possession of properties and other assets in the first week of July in consultation with the Debt Recovery Tribunal (DRT), he said.

This marks the last round of a bitter battle in one of corporate India’s most high-profile loan default cases. The lenders will be selling the airline’s properties in Mumbai and Goa, two helicopters, other fixed assets and shares of UB Group companies.

SBI has the maximum exposure to Kingfisher at Rs.1,600 crore, followed by Punjab National Bank (Rs.800 crore), IDBI Bank (Rs.800 crore), Bank of India (Rs.650 crore), Bank of Baroda (Rs.550 crore), United Bank of India (Rs.430 crore), Central Bank of India (Rs.410 crore), UCO Bank (Rs.320 crore), Corporation Bank (Rs.310 crore), State Bank of Mysore, an SBI associate bank (Rs.150 crore), Indian Overseas Bank (Rs.140 crore),Federal Bank Ltd (Rs.90 crore), Punjab and Sind Bank (Rs.60 crore) and Axis Bank Ltd (Rs.50 crore). Overall, their exposure is Rs.6,360 crore, which increases to about Rs.7,000 crore adding unapplied interest.

The lenders have also asked Srei Infrastructure Finance Ltd not to go through legal processes but to sell Kingfisher Airlines shares pledged with them in the open market, the SBI banker quoted above said. “They have agreed to do so,” he said.

There are three lenders outside the consortium—Srei Infrastructure Finance, Jammu and Kashmir Bank Ltd and Oriental Bank of Commerce.

Srei bought the loan from ICICI Bank Ltd and, as per the arrangement, if the value of the shares that it took as collateral exceeds its exposure, the consortium will get the money.

A Kingfisher Airlines spokesperson declined comments.

Under the Sarfaesi Act, only assets that are mortgaged with banks can be recovered, while DRT allows taking possession of any asset held by a defaulting borrower, irrespective of whether these are pledged with banks or not. The DRT process, however, is a long one.

While recovering through court cases, without taking help of Sarfaesi or DRT, if a borrower has to contest a claim by a banker, the borrower has to deposit 75% of the contested amount upfront with the court. However, courts frequently waive this requirement.

However, the court may decide not to waive this in the case of Kingfisher as court rulings have gone in favour of banks so far.

In that case the court will likely insist that KFA submits 75% of the contested amount with it, said a retired banker who specialized in DRT cases at a large public sector bank. But since Kingfisher Airlines is not in a position to submit such a huge sum, it will prefer the DRT process, said this person.

“In DRT, there is a number of ways recovery can be delayed. There are layers of delaying tactics and it’s going to be a long-drawn process. For instance, the borrower’s lawyer may demand 60 days interval between every notice served and there are notice after notice,” the banker said.

Besides, even if the DRT rules in favour of the banks, its decision can be challenged in an appellate tribunal. Finally, the case can go to the Supreme Court.

In short, if the DRT route is taken, it will be many years before the banks can recover their dues, the second banker said.

SBI to get tough on loan defaulters

K Ram Kumar : BL ;Mumbai :June26,2013

Faced with a Rs 51,000-crore bad loans pile, State Bank of India has decided to tighten the screw on defaulting borrowers.

How? 

It is taking recovery action, such as filing winding-up petitions against defaulting companies and their guarantors.

SBI wants its field staff dealing with recoveries to go after loan defaulters and wring out as much of the outstanding loan as possible.

A secured creditor files a winding-up petition in a High Court when the borrower fails to repay debt.

Winding up of a company is a process whereby its normal activities are brought to a standstill. The company’s property is administered by a court-appointed liquidator for the benefit of its members and creditors.

ON RECORD

To keep tabs on the pledged security, bank staff have been asked to take photographs of the properties during inspectionand keep them in the records, said a senior bank official.

SBI will take physical possession of the assets charged to it by the defaulters to preserve their value and realise the maximum amount from their auction.

Earlier, the bank used to just take symbolic possession of a pledged asset by pasting a notice that the property belongs to it. Defaulting borrowers sometimes take advantage of symbolic possession to sell off plant and machinery and other pledged assets.

The official said, the bank may consider acquiring some properties at the reserve price for its own use when their auction fails.

In the case of loan accounts classified as doubtful, up-to-date valuation of such accounts will have to be done so that they can be showcased to asset reconstruction companies (ARCs).

A loan account is classified as doubtful if it has remained non-performing for more than 12 months. ARCs are in the business of resolving non-performing loans bought from banks and financial institutions.

Due to economic slowdown, which has affected its borrowers’ ability to repay loans, SBI’s bad loans increased by Rs 11,513 crore in FY13 to Rs 51,189 crore as at March-end 2013.

In FY13, the bank saw a gross reduction of Rs 20,480 crore in bad loans. Fresh slippages amounted to Rs 31,993 crore.

BREAK-UP

A break-up of SBI’s bad loans portfolio shows that as on March-end 2013, mid-corporate segment accounted for 36 per cent of the total bad loans; small and medium enterprises (28.4 per cent); agriculture (19.8 per cent); retail (8.3 per cent); international (5.5 per cent); and large corporate (2 per cent).

ramkumar.k@thehindu.co.in

(This article was published on June 25, 2013)

Keywords: State Bank of India, loan defaulters, NPAs, asset reconstruction companies, bad loans, 

Canara Bank focussing on bringing down NPA

PTI : BL : June 25,2013

Canara Bank is taking various measures, including loan restructuring, to bring down its mounting non-performing assets (NPA), a top bank official said today.

As against the overall 2.5 per cent NPA, education loan sector had an NPA of nine per cent, followed by agriculture six to seven per cent and MSME sector five per cent pan India, bank Chairman and Managing Director, R K Dubey said here.

Stating that education sector’s NPA stood at about Rs 4,200 crore, he said the bank had two months ago launched a campaign in which the officials would meet the students and their parents, enquire about their problems and suggest restructuring of their loans.

Accordingly, the customers would be given more time from seven year to nine years to repay the loan.

The campaign has evoked tremendous response and the bank was able to recover Rs 53 crore during the period, Dubey said.

Dubey, here to review the performance of branches in Coimbatore circle, said the bank would take its total branches to 5,000 from the present 3,721, in another two years by setting up new ones in the North East, Jammu and Kashmir and Jharkhand among other states, with focus on rural and semi-urban areas.

He said the bank would extend its e-Lobby product, which has been a success in Bengaluru and Delhi, to important cities, including Coimbatore.

The e-Lobby has facilities like ATM, cash and cheque deposits, passbook printing and also internet banking under one roof, Dubey said.

Earlier Dubey donated a bus to Sankara Eye Foundation on behalf of the bank and also disbursed loans worth Rs 127 crore to 4,300 beneficiaries including weavers, farmers, SHGs SMEs and Transgenders.

(This article was published on June 25, 2013)