<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>1959 (5) TMI 51 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=272756</link>
    <description>A statutory banking licence scheme was upheld as a reasonable regulatory control, because the Act itself supplied the policy and standards guiding discretion, including financial soundness and depositor protection, so the provision was not treated as unconstitutional restraint or excessive delegation. The Reserve Bank&#039;s refusal of a licence was found non-arbitrary, as it rested on repeated inspections, communications, and materials showing unsatisfactory accounts, weak reserves, inadequate deposits, and other indications that the applicant was not being run on sound banking lines. Inspection material was also held usable when considering a pending licence application, and the refusal was sustained.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 01 May 1959 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 16 May 2018 17:28:21 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=520548" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1959 (5) TMI 51 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=272756</link>
      <description>A statutory banking licence scheme was upheld as a reasonable regulatory control, because the Act itself supplied the policy and standards guiding discretion, including financial soundness and depositor protection, so the provision was not treated as unconstitutional restraint or excessive delegation. The Reserve Bank&#039;s refusal of a licence was found non-arbitrary, as it rested on repeated inspections, communications, and materials showing unsatisfactory accounts, weak reserves, inadequate deposits, and other indications that the applicant was not being run on sound banking lines. Inspection material was also held usable when considering a pending licence application, and the refusal was sustained.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 01 May 1959 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=272756</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>