Issues on Finance :

Issues on Finance :

 Suspected large bank fraud cases to be examined by the panel prior to the investigation

By Runal Sen. 

 Dated 8th February 2020

All major alleged bank fraud cases will need a panel analysis before lenders agencies such as the Central Investigation Bureau (CBI) take action. The system has been designed to allow bankers to take decisions without thinking about credit flows and release them, a top government official told ET.The Central Vigilance Commission (CVC) has established the planning board on banks and financial frauds to find grievances against bankers in consultation with India's Federal Reserve Bank (RBI) and Niti Aayog. Former vigilanc commissioner TM Bhasin will be heading this.
The five-member board will act because first level of scrutiny for all suspected cases of fraud involving Rs 50 crore or more and head or higher rank executives will operate. Within a month, the Board will select matters.This is being done to make sure that banks lend with none fear,” the official said. “Bankers are apprehensive of coming under the glare of investigative agencies for even a bonafide decision going wrong.”

The idea behind the move is to ring find these managers to ensure that there is no curtailment of credit flow due to fear of subsequent inquiries. Even the investigative agencies will be expected to refer cases which are open to the panel for consideration before any action is taken.

Bank credit last year rose by 7.1 per cent, the second slowest in the last decade.The move comes close on the heels of finance minister Nirmala Sitharaman sending a robust message to banks to lend without worrying about the "three Cs" at a meeting last month to which the CBI director also attended for this fraud. It applies to India's CBI, Controller and Auditor General, and hence, the CVC.
Sitharaman had told bankers that it would make a distinction between legitimate commercial failure and bank-led intentional wrong doing.PSBs (public sector banks) shall refer all matters of suspected fraud involving amounts of cash exceeding Rs 50 Crore for public servants equal in rank to the general managers. 

State supervisory bodies are also advised to follow an analogous arrangement or to refer the board's interest in matters relating to the provisions of the central act that the Prevention of Corruption Act applies to matters within their respective jurisdiction during a harmonious and consistent process, the CVC stated.The newly formed board must pick its internal procedures and keep the commission updated on a quarterly basis about its operations, the CVC said, adding that the guidelines will apply in all cases of bank fraud henceforth.

HR issues :

OLA Detects Corrupt Practices

An Ola spokesperson confirmed that the event claiming that there is an indoor investigation that is currently underway and that no details can be given immediately to others.Home-grown ride-hailing application in Bengaluru, Ola stated an inspect into fraud law allegations against the company’s HR and administration head about this case, Saikia Yugantar, who was allegedly involved in favoring select recruitment vendors and reversely receiving money estimated to be worth many dollars than content, consistent with a Factor Daily affirmed.

Yugantar remains on the corporate rolls for the purpose of the investigation.In January 2015, Saikia was recruited to go to Ola for human resources and was also given additional responsibility of Chief Administrative Officer over the course of a few months.

He completed his notice period and was expected to leave the company by the end of March, but his laptop was confiscated during the last week and he was told to no longer report to work.
He served his notice period and was expected to leave the company by the end of March, but his laptop had been seized in the last week and he was asked not to report back to work.

Corporate sources say the investigation has been underway since the beginning of January.Prior to Ola spokesperson, Saikia was one of the senior director at Silicon Valley-headquartered in California, us analytics software company FICO and also worked at American Express, for 2 years after receiving an MBA from XLRI Jamshedpur.

Ola, which is valued over $4 billion, is backed by a number of the world's biggest technology investors like Japan's Softbank and China's Tencent Corporation. 

PUSH FOR LEASING BUSINESS

Ola has 10,000 vehicles on the verge, making it the largest operating leasing company in Asia. Regulatory filings show that Ola had Rs 1,237 crore worth of property, plant and equipment on record for the financial year of March 2019. "These companies are both high-margin and low-risk investments," the quoted person said earlier, adding that the plan has varied since its first launch in 2016.

In 2016, the corporate was leasing cars to drivers for an initial deposit then monthly lease payments with an choice to own the vehicle after three years.Nonetheless, in just one year, drivers began defaulting on loan payments due to a decline in incentives and a rise in take-up rates.


This time around, Ola is watching leasing to corporate and for its self-drive business and to not drivers to feature more capacity on its platform. Both these businesses are high-margin for the company. It also works with companies such as Vogo to lease two-wheelers to the firm for a monthly fee. Ola and Vogo had jointly said they will add 100,000 two-wheelers onto the roads with an investment of $100 million in sourcing the scooters. “There is also a layer of maintenance and management infrastructure being built to keep cost of running vehicles low,” said a person aware of the development.

LOWERING LOSSES
Ola's announced revenue rose 16 per cent to Rs 2,155 crore for 2018-19, while losses fell to Rs 1,158 crore by quite half compared to the previous year. Since then, the company has also cut its staff and restructured the organisation to make it more streamlined.

 Issues on marketing : 

Domino's trashed by a customer for charging Rs 13 for a carry bag 

The sub Section (5) of Section 36 of the Sale of products Act, 1930, states that ‘unless otherwise agreed, the expenses of and accompanying putting the products into a deliverable state shall be borne by the vendor, and if this law is violated, the vendor has got to pay a hefty fine for it. Well, this is often what precisely happened with a Domino’s Pizza outlet in Chandigarh.

After several state governments decided to travel plastic-free, people are carrying their own carry bags to stores during a bid to save lots of the environment. But if in the least we find yourself buying a carry bag from the stores lately, the worth purchased it pinches us quite anything, right? But as reported by India Today, the law holds that buyers ‘cannot’ be asked to buy a carry bag.

Pankaj Chandgothia, a lawyer by profession was asked to pay Rs.13.33 for a carry bag by the corporate following which he filed a complaint with the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum-II. Chandgothia had quoted the sub Section (5) of Section 36 of the Sale of products Act, 1930 in his application to the forum.

After a customer was wrongly charged Rs.14 by the outlet for providing a carry bag to him, the corporate was asked to deposit Rs.9,80,000 as penalty in Poor Patient Welfare Fund (PPWF) aside from refunding Rs.14 each to 2 different consumers and paying Rs.1500 as compensation for ‘harassment, mental agony and litigation expenses.

When the matter reached the Chandigarh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, the commission dismissed Jubilant Food Works Limited’s (parent company of Domino’s Pizza) appeal and asked it to pay the penalty and therefore the compensation amount.

this isn’t that the primary time that the corporate is slapped with such a hefty fine. According to the report the (DCDR) District Consumer Disputes Redressal in July this year had penalized Jubilant Food Works Limited Rs.5 lakh for charging Rs.14 from another customer. the corporate had earlier filed an appeal against the District Consumer Forum saying “there was no law to ban sellers from charging for carry bags.

Previously, a well-liked shoe shop Bata was fined Rs.9000 for charging customer Rs.3 for a sack. Well, subsequent time a store charges you for a carry bag, you now know exactly what to do.

The forum noted that Domino's submitted that it had been only under plastic waste (under management and handling) rules notified in 2011 by the union ministry of environment and forests that it started charging for carry bags.

Discarding this justification, the forum held, ''that notification particularly required retailers to supply only plastic carry bags of a specified quality, and while doing therefore the rules said, " no carry bags shall be made available freed from cost by retailers to consumers”.

Domino's has no right to recover the expenses borne by it on the packing of the products and putting the products during a deliverable state,” Justice Raj Shekhar Attri president of the commission, said in his order.

Justice Attri in his order said within the case of Pankaj Chandgothia vs Domino's, “the compensation awarded by the Forum-1 was inadequate and it should be adequate to the relief granted within the case of Jitender Bansal on the idea of doctrine of equality and stare decisions which needs that in both complaints, equal relief be granted because the facts in both complaints are like one another .”

The commission dismissed the appeals filed by Domino's with further costs of Rs 2,500 to be paid to the complainant and accepted the appeal filed by Pankaj Chandgothia with costs of Rs 2,500 to be paid by Domino's.

The commission also directed Domino's to refund to the complainant Rs 13.33 wrongly charged for the carry bag, to pay Rs 1,500 towards compensation for harassment and mental agony and litigation expenses, to deposit Rs 10,000 within the consumer legal aid account of the state commission and deposit Rs 4,90,000 within the Poor Patient Welfare Fund (PPWF) of the PGIMER, and submit the receipt thereof with the commission.

The exact same order has been passed within the second case of Jitender Bansal while dismissing the appeal filed by Domino's with costs of Rs 2,500 to be paid to the complaint.Well everyone has their own perception but according to me in both of cases they showed courage to come in the front. Charging Rs 14 was totally unethical and the penalty of 9,80,000 imposed on them is valid.  The company should understand the terminology of being a goodwill company, its not ethically right to charge for carry bags with their tags of domino’s.