Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
Make Most of Text Search
  1. Checkout this video tutorial: How to search effectively on TaxTMI.
  2. Put words in double quotes for exact word search, eg: "income tax"
  3. Avoid noise words such as : 'and, of, the, a'
  4. Sort by Relevance to get the most relevant document.
  5. Press Enter to add multiple terms/multiple phrases, and then click on Search to Search.
  6. Text Search
  7. The system will try to fetch results that contains ALL your words.
  8. Once you add keywords, you'll see a new 'Search In' filter that makes your results even more precise.
  9. Text Search
Add to...
You have not created any category. Kindly create one to bookmark this item!
Create New Category
Hide
Title :
Description :
❮❮ Hide
Default View
Expand ❯❯
Close ✕
🔎 Case Laws - Adv. Search
TEXT SEARCH:

Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search

Search In:
Main Text + AI Text
  • Main Text
  • Main Text + AI Text
  • AI Text
  • Title Only
  • Head Notes
  • Citation
Party Name: ?
Party name / Appeal No.
Law:
---- All Laws----
  • ---- All Laws----
  • GST
  • Income Tax
  • Benami Property
  • Customs
  • Corporate Laws
  • Securities / SEBI
  • Insolvency & Bankruptcy
  • FEMA
  • Law of Competition
  • PMLA
  • Service Tax
  • Central Excise
  • CST, VAT & Sales Tax
  • Wealth tax
  • Indian Laws
Courts: ?
Select Court or Tribunal
---- All Courts ----
  • ---- All Courts ----
  • Supreme Court - All
  • Supreme Court
  • SC Orders / Highlights
  • High Court
  • Appellate Tribunal
  • Tribunal
  • Appellate authority for Advance Ruling
  • Advance Ruling Authority
  • National Financial Reporting Authority
  • Competition Commission of India
  • ANTI-PROFITEERING AUTHORITY
  • Commission
  • Central Government
  • Board
  • DISTRICT/ SESSIONS Court
  • Commissioner / Appellate Authority
  • Other
Situ: ?
State Name or City name of the Court
Landmark: ?
Where case is referred in other cases
---- All Cases ----
  • ---- All Cases ----
  • Referred in >= 3 Cases
  • Referred in >= 4 Cases
  • Referred in >= 5 Cases
  • Referred in >= 10 Cases
  • Referred in >= 15 Cases
  • Referred in >= 25 Cases
  • Referred in >= 50 Cases
  • Referred in >= 100 Cases
From Date: ?
Date of order
To Date:
TMI Citation:
Year
  • Year
  • 2025
  • 2024
  • 2023
  • 2022
  • 2021
  • 2020
  • 2019
  • 2018
  • 2017
  • 2016
  • 2015
  • 2014
  • 2013
  • 2012
  • 2011
  • 2010
  • 2009
  • 2008
  • 2007
  • 2006
  • 2005
  • 2004
  • 2003
  • 2002
  • 2001
  • 2000
  • 1999
  • 1998
  • 1997
  • 1996
  • 1995
  • 1994
  • 1993
  • 1992
  • 1991
  • 1990
  • 1989
  • 1988
  • 1987
  • 1986
  • 1985
  • 1984
  • 1983
  • 1982
  • 1981
  • 1980
  • 1979
  • 1978
  • 1977
  • 1976
  • 1975
  • 1974
  • 1973
  • 1972
  • 1971
  • 1970
  • 1969
  • 1968
  • 1967
  • 1966
  • 1965
  • 1964
  • 1963
  • 1962
  • 1961
  • 1960
  • 1959
  • 1958
  • 1957
  • 1956
  • 1955
  • 1954
  • 1953
  • 1952
  • 1951
  • 1950
  • 1949
  • 1948
  • 1947
  • 1946
  • 1945
  • 1944
  • 1943
  • 1942
  • 1941
  • 1940
  • 1939
  • 1938
  • 1937
  • 1936
  • 1935
  • 1934
  • 1933
  • 1932
  • 1931
  • 1930
Volume
  • Volume
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
TMI
Example : 2024 (6) TMI 204
By Case ID:

When case Id is present, search is done only for this

Sort By:
RelevanceDefaultDate
    No Records Found
    ❯❯
    MaximizeMaximizeMaximize
    0 / 200
    Expand Note
    Add to Folder

    No Folders have been created

      +

      Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?

      NOTE:

      Case Laws
      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Results Found:
      AI TextQuick Glance by AIHeadnote
      Show All SummariesHide All Summaries
      No Records Found

      Case Laws

      Back

      All Case Laws

      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Showing
      Records
      ExpandCollapse
        No Records Found

        Case Laws

        Back

        All Case Laws

        Showing Results for : Reset Filters
        Case ID :

        📋
        Contents
        Note

        Note

        -

        Bookmark

        print

        Print

        Login to TaxTMI
        Verification Pending

        The Email Id has not been verified. Click on the link we have sent on

        Didn't receive the mail? Resend Mail

        Don't have an account? Register Here

        <h1>Court Orders Banks to Refund Disputed Amounts, Pay Interest, and Bear Costs</h1> <h3>Bank of Baroda Versus Nadiad Machinery and Electrical Merchant Credit Co-op. Soc. Ltd.</h3> The Court directed the banks to refund the disputed amounts to the petitioners, subject to compliance with certain conditions, and to pay the undisputed ... - Issues Involved:1. Refund of fixed deposit receipts.2. Adjudication of disputed questions of fact under Article 226.3. Constitution and authority of the Committee.4. Vicarious liability of banks for fraud committed by their employees.5. Payment of interest on fixed deposit receipts.Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:1. Refund of Fixed Deposit Receipts:The petitions were filed by 22 co-operative banks or co-operative credit societies seeking a directive for the Bank of Baroda and Indian Bank to refund the amounts of fixed deposit receipts. The petitioners discovered that their investments had been misappropriated through fraudulent withdrawals in the form of loans or advances against those fixed deposit receipts without any authorization. The amounts involved were around Rs. 30 Crores. The banks contended that the fixed deposit receipts were pledged as security for advances obtained against them and subsequently adjusted against the outstanding advances. The learned Single Judge directed the formation of a Committee to investigate and report on the amounts due and payable to the petitioners.2. Adjudication of Disputed Questions of Fact under Article 226:The banks argued that the petitions raised seriously disputed questions of fact which could not be decided under Article 226 of the Constitution and that the petitioners had an equally efficacious alternative remedy by way of filing civil suits. The learned Single Judge admitted the petitions, noting that while disputed questions of fact may not be gone into under Article 226, the Court was required to consider the interests of the depositors and the manner in which the deposits were handled by the banks.3. Constitution and Authority of the Committee:The learned Single Judge constituted a Committee chaired by the Deputy Governor of the Reserve Bank of India or his nominee, with one member from the Reserve Bank of India and one member from the Bank of Baroda/Indian Bank. The Committee was tasked with examining each case on its merits, determining the amounts due and payable, and identifying the officers/employees responsible for the fraud. The findings of the Committee were to be binding on both sides and implemented forthwith. The Supreme Court upheld the constitution of the Committee, directing it to investigate and report on the disputed amounts and entitlements.4. Vicarious Liability of Banks for Fraud Committed by Their Employees:The Committee found that the fraud could not have occurred without the active connivance of the bank officials. The banks' own internal investigations revealed serious lapses and irregularities by their officers, including accepting deposits and granting advances through middlemen without proper verification. The Committee concluded that the banks could not absolve themselves of liability and recommended that the banks refund the disputed amounts to the petitioners. The Court held that the banks, being state entities, could not avoid their civil liability for the actions of their employees.5. Payment of Interest on Fixed Deposit Receipts:The Committee recommended that the petitioner depositors be refunded the disputed amounts without any interest and the undisputed amounts with interest at the savings bank account rate. The Court upheld this recommendation, directing the banks to pay the disputed amounts by a specified date and to pay interest at 9% per annum for any delay beyond that date.Conclusion:The Court directed the banks to refund the disputed amounts to the petitioners, subject to compliance with certain conditions, and to pay the undisputed amounts with interest at the savings bank rate. The banks were also directed to bear the costs of the writ petitions and appeals. The appeals were disposed of in terms of these directions.

        Topics

        ActsIncome Tax
        No Records Found