SBT, SBI General Insurance ties up for affordable health plan

http://www.thehindubusinessline.com/industry-and-economy/banking/sbt-sbi-general-insurance-ties-up-for-affordable-health-plan/article5401366.ece

State Bank of Travancore (SBT) and SBI General Insurance today jointly launched an affordable health insurance plan for SBT customers.

“SBI General Insurance and SBT today jointly announced the launch of SBI General’s Group Health Insurance Policy exclusively for SBT account holders and their families,” SBI General said in a release.

In terms of affordability, for a 35-year-old adult the policy will cost Rs 1,300 per year to have an Rs 100,000 cover which means Rs 3.56 per day.

The policy has benefits such as multiple coverage options, no pre—policy medical test up to age of 65 years for people with no medical history, 142 day care procedures covered, guaranteed renewal upon option.

Besides, it also offers coverage of pre and post—hospitalisation expenses transparent claim process and cashless treatment across over 3,000 hospitals in the network.

India has one of the highest out—of—pocket health care expenditures in the world. One of the major reasons that India’s poor incur debt is the cost of health, Bhaskar J Sarma, MD & CEO of SBI General Insurance said.

“What we really need is a health insurance which is priced just right and affordable for the vast majority of people. Health insurance that is affordable is the key for penetrating further in semi—urban and rural areas.

SBI General’s Health Insurance Policy is designed to protect the happiness of the family with its affordable premium,” Sarma said.

Tata Sons withdraws application for new bank license: RBI

http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/news-by-industry/banking/finance/banking/tata-sons-withdraws-application-for-new-bank-license-rbi/articleshow/26475451.cms

Tata Sons, the holding company of the Tata Group, has withdrawn its application for a domestic banking license, RBI said in a statement on Wednesday.

"The company has indicated that its current financial services operating model best supports the needs of the Tata Group's domestic and overseas strategy, and provides adequate operating flexibility to its companies, while securing the interests of the Group's diverse stakeholder base," the Reserve Bank of India said.

The RBI has accepted the application withdrawal request, according to the statement.

Tata Sons had filed the application on July 1, according to the RBI. 

SC: No overkill in cheque bounce cases

http://www.business-standard.com/article/opinion/sc-no-overkill-in-cheque-bounce-cases-113112500012_1.html

Once the amount in a dishonoured cheque is paid with interest and compensation, the payee cannot insist on criminal prosecution of the directors of a firm who issued the cheque. 

The object of Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, which makes issuing of cheques without sufficient balance in the account an offence, is meant to "inculcate faith in the efficacy of banking operations and credibility of transactions. It is not meant only to punish the guilty," the Supreme Court has stated in the judgment, Lafarge Aggregates & Concrete India Ltd vs Sukarsh Azad.

In this case, directors of a construction company issued a cheque to Lafarge, but it was dishonoured by the bank leading to a criminal complaint before the magistrate. The directors moved the high court and offered to pay the amount with interest. The high court, therefore, quashed the complaint. Lafarge was not satisfied with that and appealed to the Supreme Court for prosecution of the directors.

The court dismissed the appeal observing that the directors were willing to pay double the amount. It stated that Lafarge did not appear before the high court without sufficient reason, leading to an ex parte order quashing the complaint. Moreover, it approached the Supreme Court after a long lapse of time. Under these circumstances, "if the amount offered including interest and compensation was not acceptable to Lafarge, it is their choice," the judgment said, "but that would not allow them to prosecute the directors in pursuance of the complaint."