APEX UNIVERSITY

APEX INSTITUTE OF MANAGEMENT AND SCIENCE

2. "Explain the various forms of securities used in banking and finance. Discuss their
characteristics, purposes, and how they help in securing loans and managing financial risk."

UNIT II

3. "Explain the concept of the right of set off and its significance in banking. Discuss the legal
provisions and procedures involved in a garnishee order and its impact on the banker-customer
relationship."

4. "Define Banker’s Lien and explain its types. Discuss the legal basis, rights, and limitations of
a banker in exercising lien over a customer’s goods or securities."

UNIT III

5. "Explain the different modes of charging securities by banks. Discuss how each mode helps in
securing loans and the legal implications involved."

6. "Describe the various types of collaterals used in banking. Discuss the key characteristics of
each type and their importance in the loan approval process."

UNIT IV

7. "Define Non-Performing Assets (NPAs) and explain their impact on banking institutions.
Discuss the importance of managing NPAs and outline the basic strategies used by banks to
control and reduce NPAs.

8. "Discuss the various tools and techniques used by banks for managing Non-Performing Assets
(NPAs). Explain how these tools help in the recovery and reduction of bad loans."
UNIT V

9. "Compare and contrast the RTGS, NEFT, and SWIFT systems used for fund transfers. Discuss
their features, processes, advantages, and typical use cases in the banking industry."

10. "Explain the role of fintech in transforming the financial services industry. Discuss the
importance of financial literacy for consumers and how fintech innovations can support
improved financial inclusion."
 APEX UNIVERSITY
APEX INSTITUTE OF MANAGEMENT AND SCIENCE
BANKING AND FINANCE
CASE STUDY
Forged Instruments and Cheque Bouncing under the Negotiable Instruments Act

Case Title: Minar Textile Industries vs. Bank of Baroda

Facts of the Case:

Minar Textile Industries and its sister concerns filed a suit against Bank of Baroda (formerly
Vijaya Bank) after discovering that 47 cheques, bearing forged signatures of their authorized
signatory, were encashed by third parties. Of these, 32 cheques were paid out, resulting in a
financial loss of ₹57 lakh. The bank contended that the forgeries were committed by the
petitioners' employee and sought to evade [Link] Book+1The Times of India+1

Legal Issues:

 Whether the bank is liable for encashing cheques with forged signatures.
 Whether the bank can absolve itself by attributing the forgery to the customer's employee.
 The applicability of the Supreme Court's ruling in Canara Bank vs. Canara Sales
Corporation (1987) regarding the bank's liability on forged [Link] Book+1The
Times of India+1The Times of India

Court's Findings:

 The Kerala High Court held that banks are liable for making payments on forged
cheques.
 The bank's defense, attributing the forgery to the customer's employee, was rejected.
 The court emphasized that banks cannot absolve themselves by blaming customer
negligence, especially when the forged transactions occurred within a short span and the
petitioners acted promptly upon discovering the fraud.
 The court directed the bank to refund ₹57 lakh with 6% annual interest to the
[Link] Book+1The Times of India+1The Times of India

Legal Principles:
  Banks are obligated to verify the authenticity of cheques before encashment.
 Forgery of signatures on cheques vitiates the mandate to pay, and banks cannot honor
such cheques.
 Customer negligence does not absolve banks of liability in cases of forged cheques.
 Prompt action by the customer upon discovering fraud strengthens their position in
seeking [Link] Book+1The Times of India+1The Times of India

Implications:

This case reinforces the principle that banks must exercise due diligence in verifying the
authenticity of cheques and cannot rely solely on customer negligence to evade liability. It also
highlights the importance of prompt action by customers in reporting fraudulent activities to
mitigate losses and seek legal recourse.

Conclusion:

The Kerala High Court's decision underscores the responsibility of banks to protect their
customers from fraudulent activities and the legal recourse available under the Negotiable
Instruments Act in cases of forged instruments and cheque bouncing.
 APEX UNIVERSITY
APEX INSTITUTE OF MANAGEMENT AND SCIENCE
BANKING AND FINANCE
CASE STUDY

Cryptocurrency Fraud and Legal Implications in India

Case Title: Umesh Verma vs. State of Delhi

Facts of the Case:

Umesh Verma, a resident of Delhi, was arrested for allegedly defrauding 61 investors through a
cryptocurrency investment scheme involving the Dubai-based Pluto Exchange. The scheme
promised high returns of 20–30% despite the government's de-recognition of cryptocurrencies.
Verma continued to collect investments even after the ban, leading to significant financial losses
for the investors. The Times of India+1The Times of India+1

Legal Issues:

 Whether the accused can be granted bail considering the severity of the allegations.
 The impact of cryptocurrency-related fraud on the economy and public interest.
 The role of regulatory authorities in preventing such fraudulent [Link] Times of
India

Court's Findings:

 The Delhi High Court denied bail to Umesh Verma, citing the detrimental economic
implications of cryptocurrency-related fraud.
 The court emphasized that such fraudulent activities convert legitimate money into
untraceable funds, posing a serious threat to the economy.
 Justice Girish Kathpalia noted Verma's history of fraudulent behavior, including
involvement in 13 similar cases, and labeled him a serious flight risk.
 The court ordered Verma to surrender, stating that his release could jeopardize both the
investigation and public interest. The Times of India

Legal Principles:
  Cryptocurrency-related fraud is considered a serious offense with significant economic
implications.
 Regulatory authorities must take stringent actions to prevent and address such fraudulent
schemes.
 Accused individuals with a history of fraudulent activities pose a higher risk of flight and
should be denied bail to ensure the integrity of the [Link] Times of India

Implications:

This case underscores the need for robust regulatory frameworks to address the challenges posed
by cryptocurrency-related fraud. It highlights the importance of investor awareness and due
diligence in the digital asset space.

Conclusion:

The Delhi High Court's decision reflects the judiciary's commitment to curbing cryptocurrency-
related fraud and protecting investors. It serves as a reminder of the evolving legal landscape
surrounding digital assets and the necessity for comprehensive regulations to safeguard public
interest.