SC: Suit Alleging Coercion or Undue Influence Cannot be Rejected under Order VII Rule 11 CPC  ||  Cal HC: Once ED Attachment is Confirmed, Challenge Becomes Academic; PMLA Remedy Must be Pursued  ||  MP HC: Pen-Drive Evidence Cannot be Introduced At a Late Trial Stage Without Proof or Relevance  ||  Calcutta HC: Employee Can't be Stopped From Joining Rival Post-Resignation; Trade Secrets Protected  ||  Calcutta HC: Banks Must Provide Forensic Audit Report Before Calling an Account Fraudulent  ||  Del HC: Woman Cannot Demand Re-Entry to Abandoned Matrimonial Home if Alternate Accommodation Exists  ||  Calcutta HC: Land Acquisition For Industrial Park is Public Purpose; Leasing to Industry is Valid  ||  Patna HC: PwD Recruitment Must Comply With RPwD Act; Executive Resolutions Cannot Override the Law  ||  Madras HC: Individuals Facing Criminal Trial Must Get Court Permission Even to Renew Passports  ||  Calcutta HC: Demolition Orders Cannot be Challenged under Article 226 if a Statutory Appeal Exists    

RBI imposes monetary penalty on The Bharat Co-operative Bank Limited, Bengaluru, Karnataka- (Reserve Bank of India) (05 Dec 2022)

MANU/RPRL/0561/2022

Banking

The Reserve Bank of India (RBI) has imposed, by an order dated November 28, 2022, a monetary penalty of ₹ 5.00 lakh (Rupees Five lakh only) on The Bharat Co-operative Bank Limited, Bengaluru, Karnataka (the bank) for non-adherence / violation of directions issued under Exposure Norms and Statutory / Other Restrictions - UCBs. This penalty has been imposed in exercise of powers vested in RBI under the provisions of Section 47A(1)(c) read with Section 46(4)(i) and Section 56 of the Banking Regulation Act, 1949 (AACS), taking into account the failure of the bank to adhere to the aforesaid directions issued by RBI.

This action is based on deficiencies in regulatory compliance and is not intended to pronounce upon the validity of any transaction or agreement entered into by the bank with its customers.

Background

The inspection reports of the bank based on its financial position as on March 31, 2020 and March 31, 2021, revealed, inter alia, that the bank's investment in commercial paper breached the prudential individual exposure limit of 15% of capital funds. Based on the same, a Notice was issued to the bank advising it to show cause as to why penalty should not be imposed for non-compliance with the directions.

After considering the bank's reply and oral submissions during the personal hearing, RBI came to the conclusion that the aforesaid charge of non-compliance with RBI directions was substantiated and warranted imposition of monetary penalty.

Tags : PENALTY   IMPOSITION   NON-COMPLIANCE  

Share :        

Disclaimer | Copyright 2026 - All Rights Reserved