MUMBAI, May 13 -- The Bombay high court last week directed three nationalised banks - Punjab National Bank, Indian Bank and Union Bank of India - to pay Rs.386 crore to the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) in connection with its 2011 media rights agreement with the now defunct Nimbus Communications. A single-judge bench of justice Manish Pitale passed the order on a suit filed by the BCCI for the recovery of three bank guarantee amounts executed by Nimbus in favour of the board, after the banks refused to make the payment. The court directed Punjab National Bank and Union Bank of India to each pay 37.5% of the total amount, Rs.386 crore, while Indian Bank was ordered to pay the remaining 25%. All three banks have also been ordered to pay Rs.25 lakh each to BCCI towards litigation costs. In October 2009, the BCCI had executed a Media Rights Licence Agreement (MRLA) granting Nimbus Communications rights to broadcast cricket matches in India from April 2010 to March 2014 in exchange for Rs.2,000 crore. According to the terms of the agreement, the company had to furnish bank guarantees worth Rs.2,000 crore to the BCCI. Accordingly, in October 2010, the banks issued nine bank guarantees and some of them were duly honoured as and when the board demanded the payments. However, later, Nimbus was unable to make some time-bound payments to the BCCI, which resulted in disputes. Eventually, in December 2011, the governing body for cricket in India terminated the agreement with the media company. The BCCI then sent letters to the banks invoking the remaining bank guarantees, worth Rs.1,600 crore. However, all three banks refused to honour the remaining bank guarantees, arguing that they were no longer valid after the contract termination. The BCCI contended that the bank guarantees furnished by Nimbus Communications were unconditional, irrevocable, had nothing to do with the media rights agreement and were payable to them on demand. The banks, on the other hand, claimed that they were entitled to raise certain objections regarding the contract under which the bank guarantees were issued. The bench, however, noted that the bank guarantee clauses showed that the banks had agreed to make the payment to BCCI "without any demur, reservation, contest, recourse or protest and/or without any reference". "These words clearly indicate that the defendant banks unconditionally agreed to honour their commitment and to make payment in terms of the bank guarantees to the plaintiff (BCCI), upon invocation of the same," said the judge....