Claims by banks and financial institutions for recovery of loans generally go to the Artha Rin Adalat under the Artha Rin Adalat Ain 2003. The Act sets a procedure intended to be faster than an ordinary suit, with mediation and limits on adjournments. Other disputes, such as claims by foreign lenders, inter-bank claims and claims against a bank, may go to the civil courts, the commercial courts or arbitration. Getting the forum right at the start avoids maintainability challenges that can delay banking and finance litigation by months or years, and that borrowers routinely raise.

The Artha Rin Adalat Ain 2003 gives financial institutions a power, in specified circumstances, to sell mortgaged property where the mortgage instrument authorises it, after giving notice. The power has conditions, and failures in notice, valuation or auction procedure can be challenged. Borrowers should act promptly on receiving a notice, because the window to negotiate or challenge is short. We advise lenders and borrowers on whether the conditions have been met, and whether a court challenge, rescheduling or negotiated sale is the more realistic option. Keep the notice, valuation report and any auction advertisement, as each will be tested.

A good defence starts with the documents. We examine the sanction letter, facility agreement, security documents and statements of account, check the interest and charges applied, and identify procedural defects in the suit. Borrowers can also raise the lender's own breaches, such as failure to disburse or wrongful debits. In practice, the defence also creates room to negotiate rescheduling or settlement. Appeals and challenges in this area often require deposits of part of the claimed amount, so the strategy must be realistic about the borrower's liquidity. Gather evidence of payments made and correspondence with the bank early.

Yes, where the listing or classification is wrong, outdated or inconsistent with Bangladesh Bank's rules. Common issues include loans reported after settlement, reporting of a guarantor who has been released, or classification while a court order protected the borrower. A first step is usually a formal request to the bank and to Bangladesh Bank. If that fails, a writ petition in the High Court Division may be available. Courts look carefully at the borrower's conduct and may impose conditions, so we assess the strength of the case before filing any finance litigation of this kind.

Under the Contract Act 1872, a guarantor's liability is generally co-extensive with that of the principal debtor, unless the guarantee provides otherwise. Lenders usually join personal guarantors and corporate guarantors in recovery suits. Guarantors may have defences where the lender varied the facility without consent, released security or failed to follow the terms of the guarantee. Directors who signed guarantees years ago often underestimate the exposure. We review each guarantee individually, because finance litigation against guarantors often turns on the precise wording of the instrument and the history of the facility. Old guarantees deserve fresh review.

Yes. Depending on the facility documents, a foreign lender may sue in the civil or commercial courts in Bangladesh, enforce a foreign judgment where the law allows, or enforce an arbitral award under the Arbitration Act 2001. Foreign lenders are generally not the financial institutions for which the Artha Rin regime was designed, so the forum needs to be checked. Repatriating recovered funds requires compliance with foreign exchange rules. We advise on the most effective route, the evidence required and the likely timetable for cross-border finance litigation against borrowers, sponsors and guarantors. Early tax advice also helps.

Cheque cases under the Negotiable Instruments Act 1881 are widely used, including on security cheques given at the time of a facility. They create pressure because they carry criminal consequences, but they are not a substitute for a recovery suit, and courts have scrutinised cases based on security cheques carefully. Appeals in cheque cases may also involve deposit requirements. We advise lenders on whether a cheque case is appropriate alongside recovery, and defend borrowers and directors who face cheque cases connected to wider banking and finance litigation where the claimed amount is disputed.

Arbitration is available where the parties have agreed to it, and it is common in syndicated, offshore and project facilities. Domestic bank recovery is usually pursued in the Artha Rin Adalat, but the facility documents and the identity of the parties determine the route. Arbitration can offer confidentiality, specialist tribunals and international enforceability under the New York Convention. We advise on whether an arbitration clause covers the dispute, on interim measures in support, and on enforcing awards in Bangladesh as part of a broader finance litigation and recovery strategy for the client and its lenders.