The High Court disposed of a writ petition challenging the cancellation of a non-banking financial institution's registration. The court directed the petitioner to file an appeal under Section 45-IA of the RBI Act, 1934 within 30 days.
Directed the petitioner to file an appeal under Section 45-IA of the RBI Act, 1934 within 30 days.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
W.P.No.20530 of 2018
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 14.12.2022
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.V. KARTHIKEYAN
W.P.No.20530 of 2018 and
W.M.P.No.24142 of 2018
Singhvi Finlease (India) Limited No.353, Mint Street, 2nd Floor, Sowcarpet, Chennai – 600 079. Rep by its Director Mr.Vaibhav Singhvi
...Petitioner
Vs.
Reserve Bank Of India Department of Non-Banking Supervision, Fort Glacis, Rajaji Salai, Chennai – 600 001. ... Respondent
PRAYER : This Writ Petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue writ of certiorari, calling for the records relating to the order of the respondent dated 26.07.2018 canceling the certificate of registration B-07.00509 dated 28th October 2000 issued to the petitioner and quash the impugned order.
1/6
W.P.No.20530 of 2018
For Petitioner : Mr.Arun C. Mohan
For Respondent : Mr.C.Mohan for Mr.King & Patriage
ORDER
This writ petition has been filed in the nature of certiorari to call for records relating to the order dated 26.07.2017 by which order, the respondent had cancelled the certificate of registration B-07.00509 dated 28.10.2000 issued to the petitioner and to interfere with such order.
the net owned fund of the company had fallen short of sum of Rs.2 Lakhs, from
2/6
W.P.No.20530 of 2018
the benchmark laid down by the respondent. The respondent has a responsibility to ensure that companies registered conform to the norms of the guidelines.
3/6
W.P.No.20530 of 2018
Leasing Limited, Rep., by its Managing Director, Navratnmull Naharand
and Ors. Wherein similar circumstances in a writ appeal questioning the order
of a learned Single Judge who had interfered with such cancellation of the license, the Division Bench had allowed the writ appeals but had also observed as follows in Para 46:-
“In the result, the appeals are allowed, the impugned common order passed in the writ petitions is set aside and the writ petitions stand disposed of by directing the respondents/writ petitioners to file appeal under Section 45IA(7) of the RBI Act, 1934 as amended within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment and raise all contentions before the appellate authority including the contention that as of now, all the respondents have complied with the recruitment of 200 lakhs of rupees of NOF and request the appellate authority to accept the compliance as due compliance of the requirement under the relevant notification to enable the respondents/writ petitioners to carry on their business. Such prayer be considered by the appellate authority on merits and in accordance with law. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.
9. Mr.C.Mohan stated that the observation of the Division Bench has
been consistently followed by other learned Single Judges. In this connection
further attention is drawn to an order of a learned Single Judge dated 07.06.2019 in W.P.No.4557 of 2019 M/s.V.K.Fincap Services Private Limited Vs. The Regional Director of RBI (Reserve Bank of India) and
others. Wherein the learned Single Judge had extracted the aforementioned para
46 and had followed the dictum laid in the said order.
10. I hold it would only be appropriate that the petitioner filed
4/6
W.P.No.20530 of 2018
necessary appeal under Section 45-IA of the RBI Act, 1934. The issue of limitation might stand in the face of the petitioner but as stated by the Division Bench the petitioner is granted the liberty of filing such appeal within a period of 30 days. If such an appeal is filed in accordance with law, within the said period then the Appellate Authority may take it on file, examine it in manner known to law. If the appeal is not so filed, the petitioner will have to suffer the necessary consequences.
7. The above writ petition stands disposed with the above observations. No order as to costs. Consequently connected writ miscellaneous petition is also closed.
1 4.12.2022
Index:Yes/No Speaking/Non speaking order nst
5/6
W.P.No.20530 of 2018
C.V. KARTHIKEYAN , J. nst
To,
Reserve Bank Of India Department of Non-Banking Supervision, Fort Glacis, Rajaji Salai, Chennai – 600 001.
W.P.No.20530 of 2018 and W.M.P.No.24142 of 2018
14.12.2022
6/6
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the petitioner should be permitted to challenge the cancellation of its registration license by filing an appeal under Section 45-IA of the RBI Act, 1934
Whether the petitioner is granted liberty to file an appeal within thirty days despite potential limitation issues
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Regional Director, Reserve Bank OF India Vs. Nahar Finance & Leasing LimitedFollowed¶31
2019 SCC Online Mad 38923 Regional Director, Reserve Bank Of India Vs. Nahar Finance & Leasing Limited · Who else cites this
M/s.V.K.Fincap Services Private Limited Vs. The Regional Director of RBIFollowed¶41
W.P.No.4557 of 2019 M/s.V.K.Fincap Services Private Limited Vs. The Regional Director of RBI
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Singhvi Finlease (India) Limited
Reserve Bank Of India
C.V. Karthikeyan
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
