Back
T. S. SIVAGNANAM, HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA
Punjab National Bank – Appellant
Versus
West Bengal State Cooperative Bank Limited – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Hiranmay Bhattacharyya, J.
1. This appeal is at the instance of Punjab National Bank (for short “PNB”) and is directed against a judgment and order dated 18.05.2022 passed by a learned Single Judge in WPA 19959 of 2014.
2. By the judgment and order impugned the writ petition stood allowed and the appellant bank was directed to return a sum of Rs. 26,35,18,453,93/- together with interest to the first respondent within the time limit stipulated in the said order.
3. The first and second respondents in this appeal filed a writ petition praying for a direction upon the Branch Manager of PNB to refund and/or return the sum of Rs. 20 crores deposited on 24.01.2023 in the form of fixed deposits for a period of three years with PNB together with interest thereon.
4. The first writ petitioner/the first respondent herein is a State Co-operative Bank and a Schedule Bank within the meaning of the Reserve Bank of India Act 1934 carrying on, inter alia, banking business. The respondent no. 1 herein at the relevant point of time claims to have negotiated with several bankers to obtain maximum available interest on its deposit. PNB agreed to provide the highest available interest to the resp
Banks are duty-bound to honor acknowledged deposits and pay maturity values, and cannot deny liability based on alleged fraudulent acts by their employees.
Disputed factual claims regarding fixed deposit entitlements require resolution through civil court, as Article 226 relief is not applicable. Claims may be additionally time-barred.
Point of Law : Merely because the Bank apprehends an action from the part of the third respondent, the Bank is not entitled to insist that the Fixed Deposit should remain as a lien in favour of the B....
Negligence in filling RTGS forms leads to wrongful remittance; banks are not liable for errors made by customers during the transaction process.
Limited Liability of a Customer - Unauthorized aforesaid banking transactions in the bank account of petitioner as per Clause VI of the aforequoted policy of R.B.I., petitioner is entitled to zero li....
Oral unsecured loans to NBFC qualify as deposits under RBI Act; repayable on demand absent written terms; limitation extends via balance sheet acknowledgements; no written agreement needed for Sectio....
The court upheld the authority's decision-making process and granted the petitioner an opportunity to represent their case, emphasizing compliance with applicable law.
Oral unsecured loans to NBFCs qualify as deposits under RBI Act, repayable on demand absent written terms; financial statement acknowledgments extend limitation; NCLT directs repayment under Section ....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
