Research › Search › Judgment

Kerala High Court · body

2013 DIGILAW 389 (KER)

Bharathi Amma v. Manager, Canara Bank

2013-04-12

P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON

body2013
Judgment : 1. The petitioner is stated as the widow of the deceased Sasidharan Nair who has certain deposits in the respondent Bank. Pursuant to the demise of the petitioner's husband on 27.07.2009, the petitioner is claimed to be left as the sole legal heir. The petitioner approached the respondent Bank for furnishing particulars of the account maintained by the deceased husband, so as to enable her to pursue further steps to obtain the amount from the Bank. The Bank resisted the claim saying some excuse and the representation preferred by the petitioner did not turn to be fruitful. This made the petitioner to approach this Court by filing this writ petition. 2. The prayers raised in the writ petition are in the following terms: " to issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ order or direction directing the respondent to direct the respondent to give all the details of the account particulars of late Sasidharan Nair, husband of the petitioner herein at the Canara Bank, Neyyattinkara by considering Ext.P1 and P3 within a specific time stipulated by this Hon'ble Court." 3. The respondent Bank has filed a detailed counter affidavit pointing out that the Bank is not in a position to part with the particulars for the reason that the connection of the petitioner with the deceased husband has not been established. By virtue of the mandate of Section 45ZB of The Banking Regulation Act, 1949 the course pursued by the Bank is sought to be justified; however adding in paragraph 8' that the Bank is ready and willing to furnish the details of the account (deposit left by the deceased) in case this Court passes an order to that effect. 4. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned counsel for the Bank. 5. Section 45ZB insists the party concerned to produce a decree or order or Certificate from a competent Court of law in relation to the deposit so as to enable the Bank to effect the payment. The prayer of the petitioner herein is not to direct the Bank to disburse the amount in the account of the deceased husband to the petitioner, but only to furnish the particulars of the account of the deceased husband. The prayer of the petitioner herein is not to direct the Bank to disburse the amount in the account of the deceased husband to the petitioner, but only to furnish the particulars of the account of the deceased husband. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, unless the particulars and the amount in deposit are given to the petitioner, she will not be in a position to approach the competent Court of law to obtain a Succession Certificate or to approach the Administrator General of Kerala under the relevant provisions of law satisfying the 'ad velorem' court fee. The identity and relationship of the petitioner have been sought to be established with reference to Ext.P4 Certificate issued by the Tahsildar on 20.11.2012, Ext.P5 Gazette notification, Ext.P6 tax receipt dated 16.03.2013 and Ext.P7 Pension Payment Order, wherein the petitioner is shown as eligible for pension of the deceased husband. All these particulars are stated as produced before the Bank, but the same only fell in the deaf ears of the officers of the Bank, submits the learned counsel for the petitioner. 6. After hearing both the sides, this Court finds that the petitioner is entitled to have the relief sought for. Accordingly, there will be a direction to the respondent Bank to furnish the particulars of the accounts and the amount in deposit of the deceased husband ( Sasidharan Nair) within 'ten days' from the date of production of a copy of this judgment. Writ petition is allowed. No cost.