Acchutha Guruprasad, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be

¶20

2

¶21

pleased to issue order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate Writ, Order, or Direction, declaring the illegal inaction of the Respondent authorities in not releasing the Fixed Deposit amounts and the locker articles standing in the name of late Vankadari Eswaramma, despite the petitioner being the duly nominated person, the refusal and inaction of the Respondents in releasing the said amounts and locker articles to the petitioner, who is the nominee, is wholly illegal, arbitrary, unreasonable and violative of Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India. Therefore, the petitioner seeks a direction from this Hon'ble Court to declare the action of the Respondents as illegal and arbitrary and consequently direct the Respondents to release the Fixed Deposit amounts and locker articles to the petitioner, being the nominee of late Vankadari Eswaramma, along with ail consequential benefits as this Honble Court deems fit and proper and pass

¶22

IA NO: 1 OF 2026

¶23

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the Respondents to release the Fixed Deposit amounts and locker articles to the petitioner, being the nominee of late Vankadari Eswaramma, along with all consequential benefits, pending disposal of the writ petition and pass

¶24

Counsel for the Petitioner:

¶25

1.SRAVAN KUMAR NAIDANA

¶26

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

¶27

1.N CHANDRA SEKHAR REDDY

¶28

2.GP FOR COOPERATION

¶29

3

¶30

THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE KIRANMAYEE MANDAVA

¶31

WRIT PETITION NO: 7575/2026

¶32

The Court made the following Order:

¶33

Heard Sri Sravan Kumar Naidana, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Cooperation and Sri N. Chandra Sekhar Reddy, learned counsel for the respondent Nos.2 to 4.

¶34

Aggrieved by the inaction of the respondent bank in not releasing the fixed deposit amounts and articles in the locker, standing in the name of the late Smt.Vankadari Eswaramma, the instant writ petition is filed.

¶35

It is contended that the petitioner is the brother of one late Smt. Eswaramma, who died issueless and her husband had predeceased her. The deceased Smt. Vankadari Eswarammawas holding account with the respondent Bank. It is argued that, while opening the bank account and the locker, late Eswaramma nominated the petitioner as her nominee in respect of the Bank account and the locker; similarly, she also nominated the petitioner as nominee in respect of the fixed deposits. Late Eswaramma had died on 20-08-2025. After her demise, the petitioner approached the bank authorities claiming the amounts due to him pursuant to the said nomination. As the Bank authorities did not respond to his request, he got issued a legal notice. To the said legal notice the bank had replied stating that the Bank had received a legal notice from one Sri Lakshminarayana and Sri Anand Kishore claiming to

¶36

be legal heirs of the said deceased Eswaramma. In the light of rival claims, the petitioner was asked to submit a succession certificate and the petitioner

¶37

4

¶38

was informed thatthe amounts due under the fixed deposits shall be released only upon furnishing the succession certificate.

¶39

It is contended that when a person declares someone as his/her nominee in case of his/her death, the bank authorities who had accepted such a nomination papers, are under legal obligation to honourthe same. Under premise of the said legal notice the respondent authorities have not released the fixed deposits amounts in favour of the petitioner. Thus, approached this court by way of the instant writ petition.

¶40

When the matter has been taken up for consideration,the learned counsel appearing for the respondent Bank has placed before the court copies of the legal notice received by the Bank from the alleged legal heirs, and it is argued that, on account of the said legal notice, the Bank did not disburse the amounts to either of the parties.

¶41

Considered the submissions.

¶42

Nearly two years back, late Smt. Eswaramma died on 20-082025. Except for issuing the legal notice, the alleged legal heirs did not appear to have placed before the Bank any testamentary document claiming the amounts under the fixed deposit, nor any order of restraint/injunction passed by a Court of law in disbursing the amounts. On the premise of the legal notice(s), which were issued immediately after the death of the deceased Smt. Eswaramma, in the absence of any lawful claim being put forth by the alleged legal heirs, it is not justified on the part of the Bank authorities to insist that the

¶43

5

¶44

petitioner get a succession certificate, which would defeat the very purpose of nomination. In the facts of the case, the legal notice does not even mention that the alleged legal heirs are claiming the sums pursuant to a testamentary document or that they are proposing to approach a court of law, nor any injunction being granted restraining the Bank authorities from disbursing to anyone has been placed before the Bank. The Bank has not been informed of any such approach by the alleged legal heirs to a court of law. In the absence of any such approach, there is no impediment in disbursing the amounts to the petitioner, who was nominated by the deceased Smt. Eswaramma as her nominee.

¶45

Having regard to the above this court deems it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition directing the respondent - Bank to release the fixed deposit amounts, in respect of those fixed deposits where the petitioner had been nominated as nominee of the deceased Smt. Vankadari Eswaramma, and the articles, if any, in the locker operated by the deceased, Smt. Vankadari Eswaramma, after ensuring that the petitioner is the nominee of the deceased, within a period of two (02) weeks from the date of receipt of this Order. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶46

As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed.

¶47

______________________________ JUSTICE KIRANMAYEE MANDAVA

Date: 16-07-2026 MSI

6

32

THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE KIRANMAYEE MANDAVA