SC: CIRP Can Continue Despite Fraudulent Insolvency Plea That Triggered It  ||  Delhi HC: Senior Citizen May Seek Eviction of Daughter-in-Law for Ill-Treatment  ||  Delhi HC: Mere Possession of Visa Does Not Confer an Unconditional Right to Enter India  ||  Delhi HC: Every Insensitive or Objectionable Matrimonial Act Does Not Amount to Cruelty  ||  J&K&L HC: Fake Driving Licence Does Not Exonerate Insurer If Driver Has a Valid Licence  ||  P&H HC: Safety Council Report and CCTV Cannot Be Rejected at Charge Stage for Lack of Proof  ||  Delhi High Court Stays Rs. 213 Crore SAIL Payout to British Firm over Unstamped Arbitral Award  ||  Allahabad HC: Bar Council Cannot Suspend Advocate’s Licence Pending Disciplinary Inquiry  ||  SC: CIRP Need Not Be Set Aside Solely for Fraudulent Filing of Section 9 Plea  ||  Supreme Court: Compromise Decree Passed Without Impleading Necessary Party is Void    

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