w w w . L a w y e r S e r v i c e s . i n



Bihar State Co-operative Bank v/s State of Bihar


Company & Directors' Information:- CO-OPERATIVE COMPANY LIMITED [Active] CIN = U51226DL1910PLC299886

Company & Directors' Information:- CO-OPERATIVE COMPANY LIMITED [Active] CIN = U51226UP1910PLC000093

Company & Directors' Information:- OPERATIVE INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U74300KA2008FTC048079

Company & Directors' Information:- N BANK LTD [Strike Off] CIN = U65191WB1924PLC000442

    Letters Patent Appeal 137 Of 2005

    Decided On, 21 March 2005

    At, High Court of Bihar

    By, THE HONOURABLE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE MR. NAGENDRA RAI & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.N. HUSAIN

    For the Appearing Parties: A. Amanullah, P.K. Shahi, Sarvdeo Singh, Tara Kanth Jha, Kaushal Kishore Jha, Advocates.



Judgment Text

NAGENDRA RAI, ACTG. C.J.

(1.) This appeal is directed against the order dated February 10, 2005 passed in CWJC No. 9436 of 2004 by which the learned single judge quashed the notice issued by the respondent-Registrar, Co-operative Societies, Government of Bihar, Patna, vide Memo No. 4054, dated July 23, 2004, to the writ petitioners-respondents to show cause why the board of directors of the Patliputra Central Co-operative Bank Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as "Patliputra Bank") be not suspended. While quashing the aforesaid notice, his Lordship went to the question of validity of the order dated July 5, 2004 passed by the managing director of the Bihar State Co-operative Bank Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as "co-operative bank") an apex bank of the Patliputra Bank, whose chairman and director are the writ petitioners-respondents before this Court directing de-affiliation of the Patliputra Bank from the apex bank and also ordering supersession of its voting rights with immediate effect, as a result of which Patliputra Bank ceased to be a member of the apex bank and was also divested of all the voting rights in the affairs relating to the apex bank and, held that as the said order has been challenged by the writ petitioners-respondents as well as by the Patliputra Bank in appeals, being case Nos. 105 and 106 of 2004, the said appeals will be disposed of by the Registrar, Co-operative Societies, Government of Bihar, Patna. However, he made certain observations about the merits of the matter also and in the meantime stayed the operation of the order dated July 5, 2004 passed by the managing director, co-operative bank till the disposal of the appeals. He also awarded cost of Rs. 10,000 each against counsel appearing for the State and the appellant-bank.

(2.) The admitted fact is that the appellant co-operative bank as well as the Patliputra Bank are engaged in banking business. The appellant is the apex bank of the Patliputra Bank. They are governed by the provisions of the Bihar Co-operative Societies Act (hereinafter referred to as "the Act") being a registered society. The Reserve Bank of India is the sole note issuing authority and it regulates and controls the money supply in the country. The clearing of cheques is done by bankers clearing house, Patna, which is managed by the Reserve Bank and the membership of the clearing house shall be open to all the banks including State Co-operative Bank and such co-operative banks as may be recommended by the State Co-operative Bank in the State in which they are situated. According to the Regulations of the Reserve Bank of India, the co-operative bank has issued sub-membership to the Patliputra Bank and as such its cheques are also cleared in the clearing house.

(3.) The Patliputra Bank is a shareholder of the co-operative bank and the Patliputra Bank shall act as an agent of the co-operative bank. The managing director of the co-operative bank on July 5, 2004, annexure 2 to the writ application, by a reasoned order ordered for de-affiliation of the Patliputra Bank from the apex bank on the ground of certain irregularities and illegalities which are not to be dealt with here as the same are not necessary for disposal of this appeal.

(4.) The Patliputra Bank and its chairman and director have preferred two appeals being Case Nos. 105 and 106 of 2004 before the respondent-Registrar, Co-operative Societies, and the same are pending. It is to be mentioned here that while de-affiliating the Patliputra Bank, the managing director, co-operative bank in its order dated July 5, 2004, has also recommended for supersession of the existing board of the Patliputra Bank to the Registrar, Co-operative Societies, and request him to dissolve the board of the Patliputra Bank and conduct a fresh election as per the Act. On the basis of the said recommendation, on July 23, 2004, Registrar, Co-operative Societies, Bihar, Patna, issued a notice under Section 41 of the Act as to why the board of directors of the Patliputra Bank be not suspended. The said notice was challenged by filing the writ application by the chairman and the managing director of the Patliputra Bank before the learned single judge who has allowed the same as indicated above.

(5.) It is to be mentioned here that while the writ application was pending, an interim order was passed by the learned single judge staying the operation of the notice dated July 23, 2004, issued by the Registrar, Co-operative Societies and the order dated July 5, 2004 issued by the managing director of the co-operative bank against which Letters Patent Appeal No. 876 of 2004 was filed and this Court by order dated September 10, 2004, instead of interfering with the stay matter directed the learned single judge to dispose of the writ application itself. The said order was challenged before the apex court in Special Leave to Appeal (Civil) No. 20678 of 2004 which was disposed of on November 25, 2004 and the apex court directed for early disposal of the writ application and in the meantime ordered that the interim order dated October 15, 2004, passed by the apex court shall operate subject to any modification that may be made by the learned judge.

(6.) In the show-cause notice, which is annexure 1 to the writ application, the Registrar, Co-operative Societies, referring to the recommendations of the managing director of the co-operative bank dated July 5, 2004 opined that from the said recommendation prima facie it is evident that (i) Patliputra Bank is violating its bye-laws (4-a(vii)); (ii) it has given loan to the Bihar State Housing Co-operative Federation without permission of the apex bank which is violation of bye laws No. 50 and (iii) inspite of availability of the resources, it has distributed less crop loan and thereafter asked the management of the Patliputra Bank to show cause as to why the board of directors be not suspended under the provision of Section 41(1) of the Act.

(7.) The learned single judge has quashed the aforesaid notice on the ground that the order has been passed by the Registrar, Co-operative Societies, mechanically without mentioning about his satisfaction which is in total breach of Section 41(1) of the Act.

(8.) Learned counsel appearing for the appellants has challenged the order passed by the learned single judge with regard to notice on the ground that the Registrar, Co-operative Societies has jurisdiction to issue notice and once he has issued the notice on being prima facie satisfied, this Court should not have interfered at this stage and should have asked the writ petitioners-respondents to file a show cause and state the points. Secondly, he submitted that the finding given by the learned single judge that the notice was issued without forming an opinion of existence of the grounds as required under Section 41(1) of the Act is not correct as at this stage, the authority has to only form a prima facie opinion, which means, the subjective satisfaction of the authority based on the materials. At the initial stage of issuance of notice, detailed inquiry or detailed finding is not required as that will amount to final adjudication affecting the rights of the parties without hearing them. Learned counsel appearing for the appellants also submitted that though the learned single judge did not quash the order dated July 5, 2004, passed by the managing director, of the co-operative bank on the ground that the appeals are pending but has made certain observations, which amounts to deciding the matter and which will prejudice the appellants at the time of disposal of the matter by the learned Registrar. He also said that counsel for the appellants and counsel for the State have submitted their points which could not appeal to the learned single judge but on that ground, the learned single judge should not have saddled them with the cost.

(9.) Learned counsel appearing for the writ petitioners-respondents firstly submitted that the action of the managing director, co-operative bank in issuing the order of de-affiliation by order dated July 5, 2004 is mala fide and secondly he submitted that the learned single judge was right in coming to the conclusion that the requirements of Section 41(1) of the Act were not fulfilled.

(10.) As the validity of the notice dated July 23, 2004, issued by the Registrar, Co-operative Societies, under Section 41 of the Act was challenged before the learned single judge, it is useful to refer to the relevant provisions of Sub-section (1) of Section 41 of the Act as amended in 2002.

"If, in the opinion of Registrar, the managing committee of any registered society, in which the economic interest of the Government is apparently clear, is mismanaging the affairs of the registered society or is persistently making default or is negligent in the performance of the duties, imposed on it by this Act, the rules or the bye-laws, he may, after giving opportunity to the managing committee to state its objection if any and after obtaining opinion within twenty one days from the Chief Executive of the affiliating federation/society, by order in writing suspend the managing committee for a period not exceeding six months. During the period of suspension the managing committee of the registered society shall thereupon cease to function. Registrar shall appoint, any Government servant a special officer to conduct the affairs of the society and shall fix his duties and liabilities: Provided that the suspended managing committee, if not reinstated earlier shall resume functioning immediately after six months. The period under suspension shall count towards its term."

(11.) From reading of the aforesaid provision it is clear that the Registrar has to form an opinion that the managing committee of any registered society is mismanaging the affairs of the registered society or is persistently making default or is negligent in the performance of the duties, imposed on it by this Act, the rules or the bye-laws, and has to give an opportunity to the managing committee to state its objection, if any, and after obtaining opinion within twenty one days from the chief executive of the affiliating federation/society may pass the order of suspension for a period not exceeding six months. In other words, the Registrar has to form an opinion about the existence of the grounds as provided under Section 41(1) of the Act and thereafter he may issue a notice inviting objection to the managing committee and decide the matter.

(12.) When the law requires that the authority has to form an opinion then the authorities' opinion should be subjective one based on materials. It cannot form an opinion arbitrarily and capriciously. In other words, the power is not discretionary one.

(13.) From perusal of annexure 1 it is clear that the Registrar in clear words said that prima facie, he is satisfied with the grounds as mentioned in Section 41(1) of the Act and before issuing notice the entire report of the managing director of the co-operative bank dated July 5, 2004, containing the materials for forming the opinion, was also before the Registrar, Co-operative Societies. Thus, it cannot be said that the Registrar, Co-operative Societies did not form an opinion on the basis of the materials placed before him.

(14.) It is well-settled that if there are some materials before the authority to form an opinion then its sufficiency cannot be gone at the initial stage of issuance of notice. In our view, finding given by the learned single judge that the Registrar, Co-operative Societies issued notice without forming an opinion is not sustainable in law.

(15.) There is another ground also to come to the conclusion that the learned single judge should not have interfered with the notice as contained in annexure 1 to the writ application. Notice was issued to the Patlipura Bank to show cause as to why the managing committee be not suspended. It is well settled that while exercising the power under article 226 of the Constitution, this Court normally or generally does not interfere in such matters unless it is shown that the notice is without jurisdiction. In the case of Special Director v. Mohd. Ghulam Ghouse , the Supreme Court observed in paragraph 5 as follows (page 469):

"This court in a large number of cases has deprecated the practice of the High Courts entertaining writ petitions questioning legality of the show cause notices stalling enquiries as proposed and retarding investigative process to find actual facts with the participation and in the presence of the parties. Unless the High Court is satisfied that the show cause notice was totally non est in the eye of the law for absolute want of jurisdiction of the authority to even investigate into facts, the writ petitions should not be entertained for the mere asking and as a matter of routine, and the writ petitioner should invariably be directed to respond to the show cause notice and take all stands highlighted in the writ petition. Whether the show-cause notice was founded on any legal premises is a jurisdictional issue which can even be urged by the recipient of the notice and such issues also can be adjudicated by the authority issuing the very notice initially, before the aggrieved could approach the court."

(16.) There is no dispute that the Registrar has power to issue a notice under Section 41(1) of the Act. It is also not challenged that the grounds mentioned by the Registrar, Co-operative Societies are non-est in the eye of law. Only ground for challenge was that he did not form an opinion which, in our opinion, he formed an opinion on the basis of the materials on record. Sufficiency of the materials, as stated above, cannot be gone into. In that view of the matter, the learned single judge should not have interfered with the matter at this stage and should have directed the writ petitioners-respondents to move before the authorities to file show cause. Thereafter, the matter would have been disposed of in terms of Section 41(1) of the Act. On these grounds, the order of the learned single judge so far quashing the notice dated July 23, 2004, as contained in annexure 1 to the writ application is quashed.

(17.) The learned single judge also went into the validity of the order dated July 5, 2004, passed by the managing director, co-operative bank which was not even challenged before him and had made certain observations touching on the merits of the matters. In our view, when the appeals are pending before the Registrar of the Co-operative Societies and the learned single judge has himself observed that the appeals should be disposed of, no observations should have been made touching the me

Please Login To View The Full Judgment!

rits of the matter. Accordingly, any observation with regard to the merits in the pending cases by the learned single judge shall not be noticed and relied upon by the authority in finally deciding the matters. (18.) Learned counsel appearing for the appellants-bank and the State submitted their points which did not find favour with the learned single judge, but on that ground, in our view, awarding a heavy cost of Rs. 10,000 each against them does not appear to be just and proper. (19.) Learned counsel appearing for the writ petitioners-respondents submitted that because the order passed by the managing director of the co-operative bank is the subject-matter of appeal, the whole banking business has suffered. Taking into consideration this aspect of the matter, we are of the view that the appeals should be disposed of at an early date. Accordingly, the Registrar, Co-operative Societies is directed to dispose of the same within 15 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The writ petitioners-respondents are also directed to file a show cause within one week from today before the Registrar in pursuance of notice dated July 23, 2004. Thereafter, after giving an opportunity to the other parties as well as opportunity to file a reply, the Registrar shall dispose of the suspension matter within a period of two weeks from the date of filing of the show cause by the writ petitioners-respondents. (20.) In the result, the order of the learned single judge dated February 10, 2005, passed in CWJC No. 9436 of 2004 is set aside and the appeal is allowed with the aforesaid observations/directions.
O R







Judgements of Similar Parties

07-09-2020 Commissioner of Income Tax, Mangalore & Another Versus M/s. Syndicate Bank Central Accounts Department, Manipal High Court of Karnataka
07-09-2020 District Co-Operative Bank Ltd. Durga Branch, Varanasi, Through Its Branch Manager & Another Versus Leelawati Devi & Others National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
02-09-2020 All India Union Bank Officer, Staff Association Rep. by its General Secretary, AIBOA, Chennai Versus Brajeshwar Sharma, The Chief General Manager(HR) Union Bank of India, Mumbai High Court of Judicature at Madras
01-09-2020 M. Mangalasamy Versus The Registrar of Co-operative Societies (Housing), Nandanam, Chennai & Another High Court of Judicature at Madras
31-08-2020 Dr. Vijay Mallya Versus State Bank of India & Others Supreme Court of India
31-08-2020 Chhattisgarh Rajya Gramin Bank Through The Chairman, CG 492013 Versus Meghraj Pathak, Chhattisgarh & Others High Court of Chhattisgarh
28-08-2020 Jigeshwar Prasad Deshmukh & Another Versus Authorized Officer, Bank of Baroda, Durg (CG) & Another High Court of Chhattisgarh
25-08-2020 Usha Ramachandran Versus Canara Bank, Rep by its Branch Manager, Anna Nagar (East) & Another High Court of Judicature at Madras
25-08-2020 The Deputy General Manager, Small Industries Development Bank of India, Coimbatore & Another Versus M/s. Annamalai Hotels (Pvt.) Ltd., Rep.by its Managing Director, P. Velusamy, Coimbatore High Court of Judicature at Madras
24-08-2020 M/s. Narmada Enterprises Through Its Proprietor Pramod Gendre, Chhattisgarh Versus Punjab National Bank Through Its Chief Manager, Chhattisgarh & Others High Court of Chhattisgarh
24-08-2020 ICICI Bank, ICICI Bank Through Manager, Rajasthan Versus Ram Prakash Sharma National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
20-08-2020 Indian Overseas Bank, Asset Recovery Management Branch, Rep. by its Chief Manager Versus The District Collector & District Magistrate, Coimbatore & Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
19-08-2020 Josephine Ancilda Versus HDFC Bank Limited, Rep. By its Branch Manager, Chennai & Another High Court of Judicature at Madras
19-08-2020 Sudhir Kumar Patodia Versus Union Bank of India High Court of Judicature at Calcutta
18-08-2020 Sri Nandhanam Educational & Social Welfare Trust Vellore District rep. by its Chairman, P.M.N. Mohan Krishnaa Versus The Reserve Bank of India, rep. by its General Manager, Banking Ombudsman, Chennai & Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
18-08-2020 Amal Peterson Versus The Authorized Officer, Tamilnadu Mercantile Bank Ltd., Tirunelveli & Another High Court of Judicature at Madras
17-08-2020 National Urban Cooperative Bank Ltd., Uttar Pardesh & Another Versus M/s. Khandelwal Rubber Products Pvt. Ltd., Uttar Pradesh & Another National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
17-08-2020 The Chairman, State Bank of India, Mumbai & Others Versus P.C. Unnikrishnan, Rural Marketing & Recovery Officers, State Bank of India, Kollam & Others High Court of Kerala
14-08-2020 Bank of India, Represented through its Chief Manager Versus The District Magistrate, District Collector, Virudhunagar & Others Before the Madurai Bench of Madras High Court
14-08-2020 T.V. Maniyappan & Another Versus Pattanakkad Service Co-Operative Bank Ltd., Rep. by Its Secretary & Others High Court of Kerala
12-08-2020 Krishnamoorthy & Another Versus Chengalvarayan Co-operative Sugar Mills Ltd., Periyasevalai, Rep. by its Special Officer & Another High Court of Judicature at Madras
10-08-2020 Sri Kalakuteers Apartment Flat Owners Maintenance Mutually Aided Co-operative Society Limited, rep. by its Chief Promoter & Another Versus The State of Telangana, rep. by its Prl. Secretary Cooperation Dept., Secretariat, Hyd. & Others High Court of for the State of Telangana
10-08-2020 Maranalloor Milk Producers Co. Operative Society Ltd. Represented by Its Secretary, Thiruvananthapuram & Others Versus The Registrar /Director, Directorate of Dairy Development, Pattom & Others High Court of Kerala
10-08-2020 Vipin K. Hari & Another Versus The Joint Registrar of Co-Operative Societies (General), Thrissur & Others High Court of Kerala
04-08-2020 The Managing Committee, (Under Order of Suspension), The Vellathooval Service Co-Operative Bank Ltd., Represented by Its President Versus The Joint Registrar of Co-Operative Societies (General), Office of The Joint Registrar of Co-Operative Societies (General), Idukki & Others High Court of Kerala
29-07-2020 Bank of Baroda, Through Its Manager, Maharashtra Versus Balaprasad Bansilal Biyani National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
29-07-2020 The Karassery Service Co-Operative Bank Ltd., Kozhikode, Represented by Its General Manager Versus State of Kerala, Represented by Secretary, Department of Co-Operative Societies, Government Secretariat, Thiruvananthapuram & Others High Court of Kerala
28-07-2020 Dr. Uma Suresh Versus The Authorised Officer, The National Co-Operative Bank Ltd., Bangalore & Others High Court of Karnataka
27-07-2020 Punjab National Bank, Guwahati Versus Madhab Kumar Das & Another & Others High Court of Gauhati
22-07-2020 M/s. Rajesh Export Limited, Represented by its Chairman Rajesh Mehta Versus Reserve Bank of India & Another High Court of Karnataka
21-07-2020 Vardhaman Mahila Co-op. Urban Bank Limited Versus A. Vijaya Kumari & Others High Court of for the State of Telangana
21-07-2020 State Bank Of India Mini Secretariat Through Its Branch Manager Hisar Haryana Versus Sukh Dass National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
20-07-2020 Manohar Bandopanth Belekar Versus Dr. Annasaheb Chougule Vadgaon Urban Cooperative Bank Ltd. & Another National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
16-07-2020 Cheriyan Mathew, Member, The Kanakkary Service Cooperative Bank Limited & Others Versus The Joint Registrar of Co-Operative Societies (General), Kottayam & Another High Court of Kerala
13-07-2020 Rakesh Wadhwan, Shareholder (Housing Development & Infrastructure Ltd.) Versus Bank of India, Bandra, & Another National Company Law Appellate Tribunal
09-07-2020 New Nagpur Mahila Gramin Vikas Credit Co-Operative Society Ltd. & Another Versus Suman Balaji Thakre National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
08-07-2020 Packiyalakshmi Versus Joint Registrar/Managing Director, The Central Co-operative Bank Limited, Tirunelveli & Another Before the Madurai Bench of Madras High Court
06-07-2020 B.A.S. Devi Prasad Versus The Telangana Co-operative Tribunal, Rep. by its Registrar High Court of for the State of Telangana
03-07-2020 Axis Bank Ltd., Ahmedabad Versus Securities and Exchange Board of India SEBI Bhavan, Mumbai & Others SEBI Securities amp Exchange Board of India Securities Appellate Tribunal
01-07-2020 Sony India Pvt. Ltd. Mohan Co Operative Industrial Estate, New Delhi & Others Versus Jose George Kerala State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Thiruvananthapuram
30-06-2020 Union Bank of India, Through Shri R. Rajendra Prasad, Branch Manager, Raichur Versus M/s. Tirumala Enterprises, Raichur National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
29-06-2020 Union Bank of India, Punjab Versus Usha Arora & Another National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
26-06-2020 Kejriwal Mining Pvt. Ltd. & Others Versus Allahabad Bank & Another High Court of Judicature at Calcutta
24-06-2020 M.P. Satheesan, Senior Manager (Retired), Kannur District Co-Operative Bank, Kannur Versus The Kannur District Co-Operative Bank, Represented by General Manager, Kannur & Others High Court of Kerala
22-06-2020 Sushma Kumari Versus The Bank of India, Bandra (E) Mumbai & Others High Court of Judicature at Patna
22-06-2020 Bank of Baroda Versus Indian Oil Corporation Limited & Others Supreme Court of India
19-06-2020 Toronto-Dominion Bank Versus Young Supreme Court of Canada
18-06-2020 State Bank of India, Bombay Thru. Chairman & Others Versus S.B. Singh High Court Of Judicature At Allahabad Lucknow Bench
16-06-2020 Dr. Vijay Mallya Versus State Bank of India & Others Supreme Court of India
16-06-2020 Subhash Mehta Versus HDFC Bank Ltd. National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
15-06-2020 State Bank of India Versus Consumer Affairs & Fair Business Practices, West Bengal & Others National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
12-06-2020 Awadhesh Kumar Versus Multi State Co-operative Land Development Bank, Patna & Others High Court of Judicature at Patna
05-06-2020 Neralur Milk Producers Co-Operative Society Ltd. & Others Versus State of Karnataka & Others High Court of Karnataka
02-06-2020 A. Janakiraman Versus The Railway Employees Co-operative Credit Society Limited, rep. by its Chief Executive, Chennai & Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
02-06-2020 Harsh Nitin Gokhale Versus Reserve Bank of India & Others Supreme Court of India
02-06-2020 Indian Overseas Bank Officers' Association, Reg No: 321/MDS, Rep by its Joint General Secretary, R. Muthukumar Versus Union of India, Represented by its Secretary to Government, Ministry of Finance, New Delhi & Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
29-05-2020 The South African History Archive Trust Versus The South African Reserve Bank & Another Supreme Court of Appeal of South Africa
22-05-2020 State Bank of India Versus M/s. Metenere Ltd. National Company Law Appellate Tribunal
22-05-2020 Union of India, Ministry of Corporate Affairs, New Delhi Versus Oriental Bank of Commerce, Gurgaon National Company Law Appellate Tribunal
21-05-2020 Abhay Singh Versus Bharatiya Reserve Bank Note Mudran (P) Limited, Represented by its Managing Director & Others High Court of Karnataka
21-05-2020 Dhira Sahoo Versus AO, HDFC Bank Ltd. & Another High Court of Orissa
20-05-2020 The Bank of New York Mellon, Through its attorney Navneet Singh Versus Indowind Energy Limited, Nungambakkam, Chennai High Court of Judicature at Madras
18-05-2020 Mohan Products Pvt. Ltd & Others Versus State Bank of India, Stressed Assets Recovery Branch, Raipur & Another High Court of Chhattisgarh
15-05-2020 M. Ramasamy Versus State Bank of India, Rep. by its Chief General Manager (Appellate Authority), Chennai & Another High Court of Judicature at Madras
13-05-2020 Swapan Kumar Saha Versus Bangiya Gramin Vikash Bank & Others High Court of Judicature at Calcutta
13-05-2020 Rita Mukherjee Versus UCO Bank & Others High Court of Judicature at Calcutta
12-05-2020 Sri Rama Enterprises Versus State Bank of India High Court of Andhra Pradesh
06-05-2020 Punjab National Bank & Others Versus Atmanand Singh & Others Supreme Court of India
05-05-2020 Bhanumathy Usha & Others Versus The Jammu & Kashmir Bank Ltd., Thiruvananthapuram Branch, Represented by Its, Branch Head Susil Kaloor & Others High Court of Kerala
01-05-2020 Sysco India Private Limited Versus Registrar of Co-Operative Societies, Gujarat State High Court of Gujarat At Ahmedabad
01-05-2020 Bank of Baroda Erstwhile Dena Bank Versus Suresh Chand Seth & Others High Court of Delhi
27-04-2020 Udyavara R. Acharya & Another Versus Jugal Kishor Jagannath Sharda Zenith Co-operative Housing Society Ltd. High Court of Judicature at Bombay
27-04-2020 Shaik Janimiya Versus State Bank of India, SAM Branch II, Rep by its Authorized Officer, Kachiguda, Hyderabad High Court of for the State of Telangana
22-04-2020 In the matter of: NBCC (India) Ltd. Versus ICICI Bank Ltd. & Others National Company Law Appellate Tribunal
21-04-2020 State Bank of India, A Government of India Undertaking Rep by its DGM and Branch Head Stressed Asset Management Branch, Hyderabad Versus The Union of India, Ministry of Finance Rep by its Secretary Services Tax Wing, South Block, New Delhi & Others High Court of for the State of Telangana
21-04-2020 M/s. Aruna Web Offset Printers represented by its Managing Partner & Another Versus Andhra Bank, A Govt of Undertaking, Himayat Nagar Branch & Another High Court of for the State of Telangana
17-04-2020 JR Toll Road Private Limited Versus Yes Bank Limited High Court of Delhi
07-04-2020 H.M. Prakash Versus The State of Co-operative Election Authority, Represented by its Secretary & Others High Court of Karnataka
06-04-2020 Anant Raj Limited Versus Yes Bank Limited High Court of Delhi
01-04-2020 Barclays Bank plc Versus Various Claimants United Kingdom Supreme Court
01-04-2020 Aspen Underwriting Ltd & Others (Appellants) Versus Credit Europe Bank NV United Kingdom Supreme Court
23-03-2020 S. Senthamarai Kannan Versus The Chief Manager, Canara Bank, Palani Branch, Dindigul District & Another Before the Madurai Bench of Madras High Court
20-03-2020 M/s. Himalaya Pack & Print & Others Versus Punjab & Sind Bank & Others High Court of Himachal Pradesh
20-03-2020 Himachal Pradesh Gramin Bank Versus Achhari Devi & Others Himachal Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Shimla
19-03-2020 Smitha & Others Versus Kerala Co-Operative Tribunal Thiruvananthapuram & Others High Court of Kerala
19-03-2020 Branch Manager, Indusind Bank Ltd. Represented By Its Constituted Attorney Sri Souptik Bose Versus Abdul Rajek Khan National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
18-03-2020 Bratirima Kar Versus Branch Manager, Central Bank of India & Another West Bengal State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Kolkata
18-03-2020 Prince Versus The Branch Manager, Indian Bank, Thillainagar Branch, Trichy & Another Before the Madurai Bench of Madras High Court
17-03-2020 P.B. Biju Versus The Managing Committee of The Vayyattupuzha Service Co-Operative Bank, Ltd No. Q 354, Represented by Its President, Pathanamthitta District & Others High Court of Kerala
17-03-2020 Bank of Baroda V/S Kotak Mahindra Bank Ltd. Supreme Court of India
17-03-2020 A Marine Industries Munambam, Ernakulam, Represented by Its Proprietor, P.T. Francis & Others Versus UCO Bank, Represented by The Chief Manager, Ernakulam & Another High Court of Kerala
16-03-2020 Sanjeev Kumar Bansal Versus M/s. Kotak Mahindra Bank Ltd., Chennai & Another High Court of Judicature at Madras
16-03-2020 Jeevan Niwas Co-operative Housing Society Ltd. & Another Versus The State of Maharashtra through Department of Co-operation & Textiles, Mantralaya & Others High Court of Judicature at Bombay
13-03-2020 Alla Sanyasi Rao & Another Versus Bank of India, Mumbai rep. by its Chairman & Managing Director & Others High Court of Andhra Pradesh
12-03-2020 Tirur Motor Transport Co-Operative Society Ltd., Represented by President, Tirur & Another Versus The Joint Registrar of Co-Operative Societies(General), Malappuram & Another High Court of Kerala
12-03-2020 M. Subramaniyan, President, Chennai Government Officers Co-operative Building Society Ltd., Chennai Versus The Registrar (Housing), Vepery, Chennai & Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
12-03-2020 Syndicate Bank Versus Dhanashreeli Chettiar & Another Maharashtra State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Mumbai
10-03-2020 Raveendran Nair Versus The State Co-Operative Election Commission, Represented by Its Secretary, Thiruvananthapuram & Others High Court of Kerala
06-03-2020 RAUS Constructions Pvt. Ltd. Versus Indian Bank High Court of for the State of Telangana
06-03-2020 Krishna Enterprise & Others Versus Axis Bank Limited & Another` High Court of Judicature at Calcutta