https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=384714 A deposit made before the High Court solely to demonstrate bona fides in a one-time settlement process, and expressly kept with the Registry, could not be appropriated by the bank. The SC applied the principle that a secured creditor may proceed only against identified secured assets, and held that money deposited for a collateral procedural purpose is neither a secured asset nor secured debt. Because the amount was not paid in satisfaction of the debt and no lawful basis or consent supported retention, the bank had no lien or right of set-off. The deposited amount was therefore refundable to the borrowers with accrued interest. en-us Tue, 20 Aug 2019 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 21 Aug 2019 11:08:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=384714 A deposit made before the High Court solely to demonstrate bona fides in a one-time settlement process, and expressly kept with the Registry, could not be appropriated by the bank. The SC applied the principle that a secured creditor may proceed only against identified secured assets, and held that money deposited for a collateral procedural purpose is neither a secured asset nor secured debt. Because the amount was not paid in satisfaction of the debt and no lawful basis or consent supported retention, the bank had no lien or right of set-off. The deposited amount was therefore refundable to the borrowers with accrued interest. Case-Laws Indian Laws Tue, 20 Aug 2019 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=384714