NCLAT: Corporate Debtor’s Guarantor Liability Unchanged Despite Internal Adjustments Among Creditors  ||  NCLAT: Plea under IBC Section 7 Can't Be Restored After Corporate Debtor Pays Principal & Interest  ||  Delhi HC: Wife Can Be Denied Maintenance If She Fails To Submit Latest Salary Slips  ||  Kerala HC: Income of Parent Who Abandoned Family Shouldn’t Count For EWS Reservation Eligibility  ||  Gujarat HC: Writ Courts Interfering in Arbitral Procedure Orders Defies A&C Act’s Purpose  ||  Delhi HC: Plaintiff Doesn’t Have Vested Right to File Rejoinder under CPC  ||  J&K&L HC: Name Change Is Fundamental Right; Boards Must Consider Legal Documents, Not Reject Request  ||  SC: Administrative Delays by State Agencies Must Not Be Condoned  ||  Sc: When Sale Deed Is Void, Possession Suit Follows 12-Year Limitation under Article 65, Not Art 59  ||  SC: Preliminary Inquiry Report Can’t Stop Court from Directing FIR Registration    

Banning of Unregulated Deposit Schemes and Protection of Depositors’ Interests Bill, 2015 - (03 May 2016)

MANU/PIBU/0414/2016

Banking

The suggestion period for ‘Banning of Unregulated Deposit Schemes and Protection of Depositors’ Interests Bill’ may have closed on 30 April 2016, but what do the proposals promise?

The Bill is a culmination of measures suggested by an Inter-Ministerial Group identifying gaps in the existing regulatory framework for ‘deposit taking’. Basically, it bans entities not supervised by any regulator or government body from taking deposits.

Unregulated deposit schemes, like pyramid schemes, have been used to swindle depositors out of enormous sums of money. The Saradha chit fund in West Bengal and PACL are examples of schemes that have solicited thousands of crores of rupees from investors looking for ‘big returns’ in a short time. The schemes are usually allied with other ‘promises’ such as a job or property to lure investors.

Tags : UNREGULATED DEPOSITS   PYRAMID SCHEMES    

Share :        

Disclaimer | Copyright 2025 - All Rights Reserved