Understanding the Dispute Between LVB’s Tier-2 Bondholders and RBI 🏦
In November 2020, the private lender LVB announced that it would write down its ₹318 crore of tier-2 bonds prior to its merger with DBS Bank India following an RBI directive. This move was a significant blow to the bondholders, who felt they were unfairly treated and sought legal recourse.
- Reason for RBI Directive: The tier-2 bonds have a loss absorbency feature, which dictates that in the event of a bank failure, tier-2 bondholders bear the losses before depositors. With LVB reporting significant losses and negative tier-1 capital, RBI directed the write-down.
- Triggering of Non-Viability: According to the Banking Regulation Act, tier-2 bonds can be written down when a bank amalgamation occurs. In LVB’s case, the merger with DBS led to this trigger, causing bondholders to lose out.
- Allegations of Unfairness: Bondholders criticized the hasty and opaque manner in which the merger took place, claiming they invested assuming RBI would guide corrective actions to avoid such scenarios.
The Madras High Court’s Order and Implications 🏛️
The Madras High Court, in a significant ruling, directed the RBI to reevaluate the valuation of shares and assets of DBS India and LVB as of the pre-merger date. This reassessment will aid the RBI in making a fresh decision on writing off the tier-2 bonds and reducing share values.
- Court’s Directives: While upholding the LVB-DBS amalgamation, the court urged RBI to consider shareholder and bondholder grievances and mitigate hardships resulting from the merger within a strict timeline.
- Comparison with Yes Bank Case: The plight of Yes Bank’s tier-1 bondholders, who suffered substantial losses during the bank’s bailout by an SBI-led consortium, serves as a parallel to LVB’s bondholders’ predicament.
Analysis and Conclusion on the LVB-RBI Dispute 💡
The dispute between LVB’s tier-2 bondholders and RBI unveils the complexities of banking regulations and the ramifications of regulatory decisions on investor interests. The Madras High Court’s order signaling a revaluation exercise brings a glimmer of hope to bondholders seeking restitution for their losses.
This case underscores the importance of transparency and investor protection in banking sector dealings, emphasizing the need for regulatory bodies like RBI to strike a balance between financial stability and safeguarding investor rights.
By
By
By