My Quora Answer about Action against Bank Officers

My Quora Answer to:

What sort of legal action can be taken against bank officers for continuously ignoring unfair trade practices complaints? What sort of legal action can be taken against bank corporate office for not taking any action against it's own officers?

If your bank does not address your complaint within a month, you can approach the banking ombudsman. This is a senior official appointed by the Reserve Bank of India to redress customer complaints against deficiency in banking services, as per its scheme introduced in 1995. All scheduled commercial banks, regional rural banks and scheduled primary cooperative banks are covered under the scheme. So far, there are 15 ombudsmen, whose offices are located mostly in state capitals. Their addresses and contact details are available on the RBI website. You have to file the complaint at the office of the ombudsman under whose jurisdiction your bank branch is located. The grievances relating to credit cards and other types of services with centralised operations are to be filed with the ombudsman in whose territorial jurisdiction the billing address of the customer is located. You can put it down on a plain paper, send an e-mail, or fill the complaint form on the RBI website. There are no charges for filing a complaint.

Source: How to file a complaint against your bank

The Banking Ombudsman Scheme is an expeditious and inexpensive forum for bank customers for resolution of complaints relating to certain services rendered by banks. The Banking Ombudsman Scheme is introduced under Section 35 A of the Banking Regulation Act, 1949 by RBI with effect from 1995. Presently the Banking Ombudsman Scheme 2006 (As amended upto July 1, 2017) is in operation. [1] The addresses of the Ombudsman are here : link . Before filing the complaint, have a look at the types of the cases handled by the Banking Ombudsman, listed here.

Hope this answers your question.

Footnotes

[1] Frequently Asked Questions

Maharashtra State Authority to hear complaints against Builders - country first

With complaints against Builders riding in numbers, the Maharashtra State Government has decided to constitute a Housing Regulatory Authority to safeguard the interests of homebuyers. 

The authority will be a quasi-judicial body and resolve disputes related to the housing sector. Four benches are likely to be established to hear the cases at different cities in the state.

With this decision, Maharashtra, with the highest ratio of urbanisation and real estate activities in the country, will become the first state to constitute such an authority,

The Maharashtra Housing (Regulation and Development) 2012 was passed two years ago and Presidential assent came in 2014.

The deadline to frame rules for the authority is October 31 and the process is underway.

An officer attached with the housing department, said, 

"There are over 30,000 disputes pending before various courts and forums regarding alleged malpractices by developers, Most of the complaints from Mumbai and Pune are because of the high density of housing construction activities. After drafting the rules, objections and suggestions will be invited from the people to make more reforms before constituting the body."

"The state has received the official nod from the Centre to set up its own regulatory authority for the state. We are in the process of forming rules and regulations after which the authority will come into existence," he added.

Source: http://www.punemirror.in/pune/civic/Govt-body-to-solve-homebuyers-woes/articleshow/54299390.cms

Prenuptial Agreements to be the Norm? - Business Standard

Prenuptial agreements in India might not be legally tenable but, increasingly, families are going for these contracts which state the assets of the bride and groom, and the compensation the woman will receive if the marriage turns sour and the couple legally part ways.

“Families are opting for prenuptial agreements to see the intentions of the parties involved, even though the contract is not legally binding,” says senior advocate Mrunalini Deshmukh, who handled divorce cases of many Bollywood celebrities including Aamir and Reena Khan and Karisma Kapoor. She adds that the document is used to tell the court the conditions that the couple had agreed upon when they got married.

It’s not only the wealthy that are drawing up these agreements. Advocate Vandana Shah recently got a couple who asked her to help them draft one such contract. They were both part of corporate world, working in middle management. When she told them it would not have any standing in a court, they said they were making it so that both were clear on the settlement terms if they part ways.

Prenuptials are popular in developed countries such as the US, Australia, France and Germany. But in India, there are Supreme Court rulings which say any contract which has marriage as an object is null and void.

Recently, Maneka Gandhi, minister for women and child development,  recommended to D V Sadananda Gowda, Minister for Law and Justice, to make Prenuptial Agreements mandatory before marriage.

The recommendation was made as many women from lower socio-economic backgrounds have to fight endless battles over alimony, marital ownership of property and assets during divorce.
Deshmukh says, on an average, divorce cases take four to five years to conclude; but many also drag on for over 15 years. She has a client, who is still fighting a legal battle since 1999.

The idea of legalising Prenuptial Agreements has many takers.

Lawyers say it will help reduce the burden of courts. It will also end husbands and wives taking undue advantage of each other and will keep their expectations in check. It will also help solve common reasons for fights or disputes, such as division of property.

Financial planners say it will be a good starting point in a marriage. When drawing a prenuptial agreement, the entire assets, liabilities, business ownerships, among other things, are listed out. This can make both parties aware of each other’s finances before tying the knot.

Even if a prenuptial agreement does not become legal in India, there are a few things every couple should follow while managing their family finances to ensure that things don’t go awry in case they part ways.

Suresh Sadagopan, a certified financial planner, says couples should keep their finances separate and contribute towards expenses in equal proportion. If the husband’s salary is Rs 1 lakh and wife’s is Rs 50,000. They can equally contribute 30 per cent of their income to family expenses.

Shah says couples should keep their bank accounts separate and all investments should be done through individual accounts. This will not only create a trail, but also make calculation of taxes easy.

When buying property, couples should also take the ownership in the asset in proportion to their contribution, Sadagopan says. If the husband is paying 70 per cent of the equated monthly instalment, he should list his share in that proportion.

Source - http://wap.business-standard.com/article/bs/prenuptial-agreements-likely-to-be-mandatory-116020400476_1.html

Law ministry lists ways to reduce backlog - A Rehash of the same old Story?

Seems like an Old Read....
Would have helped if the previous Governments had given it a serious thought to Ramp up the Justice Delivery System in India.

From the Times of India dated:Jan 29, 2015, 06.47 AM IST

The law ministry has drawn up a list of good practices followed by some of the high courts (HC) and circulated them recently to chief justices of all HCs to implement the same as part of a common action plan to bring down pendency of cases, particularly those which are older than five years.

Setting up fast track courts, designating a special day in a week for disposal of older cases and adopting a case flow management system are some of the measures the Centre has suggested to all chief justices of high courts to be adopted for reducing pendency.

The government has also highlighted best innovative initiatives undertaken in many other countries to address the backlog. Encouraging pre-trial proceedings by several countries prior to commencement of the trial, court performance measurement and monitoring and mandatory prior notice in civil cases are some of the initiatives suggested.

In the pre-trial proceedings, followed in some countries, a meeting is arranged in chambers between judge, counsel for accused, and the prosecution and specific issues of trial are narrowed down in order to save time.

Regular assessment and monitoring of performance of courts is an effective way to bring about improved efficiency, transparency and accountability in judicial system. The law ministry suggests this could be done by introducing measurement indicators based on globally accepted benchmarks such as leadership and management, court planning and policies, court resources, court proceedings and public trust and confidence.

The government has also suggested mandatory prior notice in civil cases that would help in speedy trials. For this it has mooted a provision similar to section 80 of the Civil Procedure Code (CPC) for all categories of civil cases.

Section 80 of the CPC requires that a litigant must give two months' notice to the concerned party. The government thinks introducing this guideline by the court would help in curtailing unnecessary litigation.

Among the good practices followed by some of the HCs, the Allahabad HC has come in for praise for organizing Lok Adalats regularly during weekends. More than 3.22 lakh cases have been settled in 766 Lok Adalats in the state during March-June 2014. The largest HC in the country has also set up 171 reconciliation and mediation centres in districts with the help of the state government.

These mediation centres have settlement rates of 26%. The HC has also proposed to set up 81 fast track courts for trial of rape cases.

Gujarat National Law University to hold seminar on global arbitration - TOI news

In a unique endeavour, the Gujarat National Law University ( GNLU) is organizing a two-day seminar on international arbitration law starting from March 28. 

Being organized in collaboration with the International Chambers of Commerce (ICC), Paris; the London Court of International Arbitration (LCIA); Singapore International Arbitration Centre (SIAC), Singapore; and Amarchand & Mangaldas & Suresh A Shroff & Co (AMSS), the seminar has 'Changing Face of Arbitration in India' as the central theme. 

Legal practitioners and academicians will come together in a lecture series and throw light on the different facets of international arbitration law namely international commercial, maritime and investment treaty arbitration. Some of the biggest names in the field of arbitration, including former Chief Justice of India A M Ahmadi, additional solicitor general of India Gourab Banerjee, deputy counsel at ICC Paris Abhinav Bhushan and Tejas Karia of AMSS will be addressing the seminar. 

The first panel discussion will see official representatives from the ICC, LCIA and SIAC discuss the benefits of institutional arbitration over ad-hoc arbitration and best practices in the context of institutional arbitration. In the second panel discussion, scholars, practitioners, experts, users and arbitration enthusiasts will deliberate on how to make India a better seat of arbitration.

Source - timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/ahmedabad/Gujarat-National-Law-University-to-hold-seminar-on-global-arbitration/articleshow/32036248.cms

Courts not a forum for mere policy commentary | Business Standard

Somasekhar Sundaresan: Courts not a forum for mere policy commentary | Business Standard:

The Doing Business 2013 report published by the World Bank and the International Finance Corporation is out. India now ranks a lowly 132nd out of 185 jurisdictions all over the world in the ease of doing business. The good news is that India ranks 27th out of 50 countries that marked an improvement since 2005. The horrible news is that India continues to have a pathetic record in the area of ease of enforcement of contracts – a shameful 184th out of 185 nations.

The report, now a keenly-awaited annual feature, studies how easy it is to start and run a business. This column will mainly focus on the chapter on enforcement of contracts across jurisdictions. “A judicial system that provides effective commercial dispute resolution is crucial to a healthy economy. Without one, firms risk finding themselves operating in an environment where compliance with contractual obligations is not the norm. While using alternative dispute resolution systems may have benefits, Doing Business focuses on how public institutions function in the case of a commercial dispute,” says the report. The study seeks to measure the time, cost and procedural complexity of resolving a commercial dispute between two domestic businesses. The study takes up a notional dispute – and interestingly, a small dispute between two domestic businesses.

“The dispute involves the breach of a sales contract worth twice the income per capita of the economy,” says the report. Twice the per capita income means a really small dispute – nowhere near the Vodafone type litigation, where parties have the luxury of engaging expensive senior counsel, whose skills and standing can attract greater attention of the courts. The study assumes that the court hears arguments on merits and that an expert provides an opinion on the quality of the goods in dispute. “The time, cost and procedures are measured from the perspective of an entrepreneur (the plaintiff) pursuing the standardized case through local courts.”

India ranks better than only Timor-Leste, an infant republic. For measuring India as the last but one rank in the world in enforcement of contracts, the performance of the Bombay High Court has been taken as the basis. Here is the report card: It takes 1,420 days to get a contractual dispute of this nature enforced in Bombay High Court – twenty days just to get filings and service completed, 1,095 days for trial and judgement and 305 days for enforcement. This is just a tad higher than the longest time taken by any nation – Suriname, with 1,715 days – and India ranks sixth from the bottom.

Taking close to four years to settle a dispute over a claim of a fraction of a lakh of rupees is a pathetic record, which is why most sensible lawyers are unable to advise clients to litigate unless the stakes are exponentially higher. Besides, the study does not take into account appeals. Appeals from a decision of a single judge to a division bench, and then to the Supreme Court, can take lives of their own.

There is worse to follow: The costs of such a dispute works out to 39.6 per cent of the claim – another pointer to litigation for enforcing a contract being meaningless unless the stakes are high. India ranks 40th from the bottom. Fertile ground for private commercial versions of khap panchayats to flourish. Little wonder why Indian movies and television serials depict the local police station or the local underworld (not necessarily always in competition) as the forums that are approached for effective justice. It takes an average of 46 procedures for a dispute enforcement process in India – 25th from the bottom, and only a wee bit higher than the 55 procedures applicable in Syria (which ranks the worst in the number of procedures).
Patriots may quarrel the choice of an over-burdened court, but such opposition would be misplaced.

The Bombay High Court is a good choice, considering that Mumbai is considered to the commercial capital of India. Besides, there is little point in assuming the forum to be an ideally-burdened court like Sikkim High Court, where the intensity and scale of economic activity of the territory it presides over is just not fully reflective of India’s economic standing and scale of growth.

The report also has a sub-national analysis. Pertinently, Mumbai comes out the worst and the next worst is another hub of commercial activity – Ahmedabad.Here, the time taken is 1,295 days, the procedures are 46 in number and the cost of enforcement is 30.9 per cent of the claim. Mumbai and Ahmedabad represent an enormous chunk of the tax-paying base of the nation. Without more focused and urgent attention to judicial reform, our courts will remain a mere forum for commentary on high national policy, forgetting its prime reason for existence – enforcing the rule of law among a nation’s subjects.

(The author is a partner of JSA, Advocates & Solicitors. The views expressed herein are his own.) Email:somasekhar@jsalaw.com


'via Blog this'