As per definition u/s 5 (b) of Banking Regulation Act 1934, which of the following is not correct in the context banking business:
accepting deposits and giving loans out of such deposits
deposits are accepted from public
banks cannot refuse to accept deposits whosoever offers
accepting deposits and investing such deposits
RBI has the authority under Section 22 of Reserve Bank of India Act to issue bank notes with a denomination of:
minimum Re 1 and maximum Rs.1000
minimum Rs 2 and maximum Rs.1000
minimum Re 1 and maximum Rs.10000
minimum Rs. 2 and maximum Rs.10000
The Companies Act applies to the banking companies:
irrespective whether the provisions of the Banking Regulation Act
insofar as the provisions are consistent with the provisions of Banking Regulation Act
in relation to their registration and winding up
all the above
Every banking company has to maintain in India, certain amount of assets u/s 25 of Banking Regulation Act as at:
close of each half year
as at the close of business on the last Friday of each year
as at the close of business on the last Friday of each half year
as at the close of business on the last Friday of each quarter
U/s 38 of Banking Regulation Act, who can apply to High Court for winding up of a banking company:
Reserve Bank of India
Security & Exchange Board of India
Registrar of companies.
The banking company is required to submit to RBI 3 copies of its audited balance sheet within ___ and this period can be extended by RBI for ____.
3 months, 2 month
2 months, 1 month
2 months, 2 months
3 months, 3 months
The major portion of shares of Regional Rural Banks is held by:
The authorised share capital of a nationalized bank can be maximum:
To treat a payment as a ‘payment in due course’ which of the following conditions need not be satisfied:
payment as per apparent tenor of the cheque
in good faith and without negligence
payment must be made to a customer
payment to the person in possession of the instrument
In a joint account of X and Y, a cheque is presented in clearing and paid. Later on it is found that signatures of X are genuine but that of Y are forged.
the bank cannot debit the account of the customer. Hence the bank is liable
the bank cannot debit the account but if the forgery is in the knowledge of the customer, bank is not liable
the bank is liable for forgery, even if the payment of the cheque has not been made
the bank is not liable if the forgery is done in connivance with the drawer
X appointed Y his agent and authorised Y that he can get cheques in X’s name collocted through account of Y. Later on Y misappropriated the amount of certain cheques:
the bank was negligent in accepting such instruction. Hence bank is liable
the bank did not take adequate precaution due to which bank is liable
bank is not liable, as there was express authority from the customer
despite express authority from customer, the bank is liable for conversion.
In which of the following situations, the collecting bank shall not be held liable for conversion:
cheque deposited by X in his personal account while it was drawn in his name in his official capacity
cheque of a large amount deposited by Y in his account although bank was aware about the poor financial position of Y
cheque in the name of partnership firm, deposited by one partner in his personal account
cheque in the name of a proprietorship firm, which were deposited by the proprietor in his individual account
Before making payment of a bank guarantee, the bank is to ensure that the invocation is properly made. Which of the following may not be an important element for treating the invocation as proper:
the invocation has been made by the person competent to make the invocation
the cause of action arose during the validity period
the amount is within the amount limit of the guarantee
the invocation is within the claim period given in the guarantee
Bank is required to make payment against DPG, if:
if one or more instalments have become due and not paid by the applicant (buyer)
the major portion has become due for payment and not paid by the applicant (buyer)
the entire amount has become due for payment and not paid by the applicant (buyer)
the entire amount has become due but partly paid by the borrower
In case of which of the following loan facilities, the bank becomes a guarantor:
Which of the following securities will be more preferable by a bank from cost of creating charge and maintenance of the security :
land and building
shares and debentures
goods and merchandise
book debts of reputed companies
Against which of the following types of fixed deposit receipt, the loan can be allowed by the bank to a person called X:
the FDR issued by another bank in the name of X
the FDR issued by the bank in name of minor child of X
the FDR issued by the bank in the name of X jointly with his wife which is discharged by both of them
the FDR in the name of X kept by him as his client’s money.
In which of the following types of goods, the charge pledge can be created by the borrower:
the goods that are in possession of the borrower
the future goods also that are to be in his possession
also the goods that the borrower is likely to get into his possession subsequently
all the above type of goods
Bank-B sanctioned a term loan to XYZ limited within the condition that if the borrower failed to pay 2 instalments, the entire amount of the loan will become payable immediately. If the borrower defaults in making the repayment of 2 instalments, in such case:
the bank can treat the entire amount due for payment and can demand payment
such agreement is against law of natural justice due to which bank cannot do so
such agreements are void i.e. illegal and cannot be enforced.
the bank can recover the amount of due instalments only.
After amendment to Section 17 (2) of SARFAESI Act, what new provision has been made:
borrower can approach DRT without depositing any amount but to approach DRAT against decision of DRT he has to deposit 75% of the due amount.
borrower can approach DRT without depositing any amount but to approach DRAT against decision of DRT he has to deposit 50% of the due amount.
borrower can approach DRT without depositing any amount but to approach DRAT against decision of DRT he has to deposit 75% of the due amount which can be reduced to NIL.
borrower can approach DRT without depositing any amount but to approach DRAT against decision of DRT he has to deposit 50% of the due amount which can be reduced to NIL.