Dismissed

Deepa.T.Padman v. State Bank of India

Kerala HC11 Feb 2021WP(C)/16452/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this Writ Petition, the petitioner, who is the sole nominee of a deceased Defence Department employee, challenged the cashless free legal services. ones obtain a Succession Certificate. The court held that where a valid nomination exists, terminal benefits and pension due to the deceased nominee must be disbursed to the nominee, not to the legal heirs who obtained a succession certificate. The

What did the court decide?

Writ petition dismissed. Interim order vacated. Bank directed to deal with the account in accordance with its rules, regulations and law.

Deepa.T.Padman Vs State Bank of India — Succession and Inheritance | Kerala HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.NAGARESH

¶4

THURSDAY, THE 11TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2021/22ND MAGHA,1942

¶5

WP(C).No.16452 OF 2019(F)

¶6

PETITIONER:

¶7

DEEPA T.PADMAN, USHUS, SANKARAMANGALAM, CHAVARA P.O., PIN-691 583.

¶8

BY ADV. SRI.SAJEEV KUMAR K.GOPAL

¶9

RESPONDENTS:

¶10

1 STATE BANK OF INDIA, THANGASSERY, KOLLAM DISTRICT-691 001, REPRESENTED BY ITS BRANCH MANAGER.

¶11

2 THE DEFENCE PENSION DISBURSEMENT OFFICER, DEFENCE PENSION DISBURSEMENT OFFICE, PRATHIBHA JUNCTION, KADAPPAKKADA, KOLLAM-691 008.

¶12

3 DHARMALATHA, SREEVIHAR, SREENVASAPURAM, VARKALA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 145.

¶13

4 SUSHAMA, D/O.VASUDEVAN, VALIYA VEEDU, PULLUPANA P.O., ATTUPURAM, KADAKKAL VILLAGE, KOTTARAKKARA, KOLLAM-691 536.

¶14

R2 BY ADV. SHRI.P.VIJAYAKUMAR, ASG OF INDIA R3-4 BY ADV. SRI.M.KIRANLAL R3-4 BY ADV. SRI.MANU RAMACHANDRAN R3-4 BY ADV. SRI.T.S.SARATH SRI. JAWAHAR JOSE SC FOR R1

¶15

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 11.02.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

WP(C) No.16452/2019

: 2 :

J U D G M E N T

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Dated this the 11^th day of February, 2021

¶21

Petitioner is the brother's daughter of late T.V.

¶22

Padmasanan. The late Padmasanan was unmarried and was working with Defence Department of the Government of India. The petitioner would state that she is the nominee of late Padmasanan and entitled to receive the pension and other benefits due to late Padmasanan. The petitioner claims that an amount of ₹5,44,379/- is there in the account of late Padmasanan.

¶23

It is the case of the petitioner that respondents 3 and 4, who are sisters of late Padmasanan, have raised claims on the terminal benefits of their brother. Respondents 3 and 4 have obtained a Succession Certificate behind the back of the petitioner. On the basis of the Succession Certificate, respondents 3 and 4 are likely to withdraw the amounts from the 1^st respondent-Bank. In the circumstances,

¶24

WP(C) No.16452/2019

¶25

: 3 :

¶26

the petitioner prays that there may be an order directing the 1^st respondent-Bank not to release the amount from the account maintained by late Padmasanan, to any other persons including respondents 3 and 4, based on any documents including the Succession Certificate.

¶27

Respondents 3 and 4 defended the writ petition filing counter affidavit. Respondents 3 and 4 submitted that late Padmasanan being unmarried, respondents 3 and 4 are the legal heirs of late Padmasanan. Therefore, they have approached the Additional Munsiff's Court, Kollam, filing OP(Succession) No.2/2019 and the Additional Munsiff's Court has passed an order issuing succession certificate in favour of respondents 3 and 4 to collect the petition schedule amount. In the circumstances, the petitioner has no claim over the amounts lying with the Bank.

¶28

The learned ASGI filed a counsel statement in the writ petition. The said statement would show that late Padmasanan had nominated the petitioner as a nominee in the prescribed form which was accepted by the DPDO for payment of arrears of pension dues. The pension arrears are

¶29

WP(C) No.16452/2019

¶30

: 4 :

¶31

not paid to the petitioner since the petitioner did not produce the document sought for by the DPDO. The statement further goes to add that on receipt of lifetime arrear claim from the petitioner, she was issued a call letter for reporting with certain documents for further proceedings.

¶32

I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel appearing for respondents 3 and 4, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the 1^st respondent and learned ASGI representing the 2^nd respondent.

¶33

As far as the amount already in deposit in the accounts of late Padmasanan with the 1^st respondent-Bank, respondents 3 and 4 have already approached a court of law and obtained Succession Certificate. Therefore, if the petitioner has any claim towards the said amount already in deposit with the Bank, it is for the petitioner to resort to civil remedies available to her against the Succession Certificate issued which, according to the petitioner, was an ex-parte order.

¶34

As far as any further amounts due from the Defence Department is concerned, it has come out from the

¶35

WP(C) No.16452/2019

¶36

: 5 :

¶37

statement filed by the ASGI that the late Padmasanan has nominated the petitioner as his nominee for receiving service benefits due to him.

¶38

In view of the valid nomination made by the late Padmasanan, this Court makes it clear that any further amount towards terminal benefits and pension in respect of the late Padmasanan should go to the petitioner, who is the duly appointed nominee. If respondents 3 and 4 have any claim in respect of that amount, respondents 3 and 4 also will have to resort to appropriate civil proceedings.

¶39

With the afore findings and observations, the writ petition is disposed of. The interim order passed in the writ petition will stand vacated and the 1^st respondent-Bank will be at liberty to deal with the account maintained by late Padmasanan in accordance with their Rules and Regulations and in accordance with law.

¶40

Sd/-

¶41

N. NAGARESH, JUDGE

aks/12.02.2021

WP(C) No.16452/2019

: 6 :

APPENDIX

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:

¶47

EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF FORM A SUBMITTED BY SR.T.PADMASANAN BEFORE THE PENSION DISBURSEMENT AUTHORITY.

¶48

EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION FROM THE DEFENCE PENSION DISBURSEMENT OFFICE TO THE PETITIONER.

¶49

EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN WPC NO.12272/2019. EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE REQUEST SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT.

¶50

RESPONDENT'S/S EXHIBITS:

¶51

EXHIBIT R3(A) A TRUE COPY OF THE DEATH CERTIFICATE OF LATE PADMASANAN

¶52

EXHIBIT R3(B) A TRUE COPY OF THE FAMILY MEMBERSHIP CERTIFICATE IN FAVOUR OF THE 3RD AND 4TH RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT R3(C) A TRUE COPY OF THE SUCCESSION CERTIFICATE DATED 18.03.2019.

Deepa.T.Padman v. State Bank of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Deepa.T.Padman v. State Bank of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

S.S.Satheesachandran Vs P.Venugopal

K.K.Ummer, Vs the District Collector

Kerala Handball Association Vs Union of India

Gowri.S. Vs State of Kerala

Madhu T. K. Vs the State of Kerala

Modern Construction Company Pvt. Ltd. Vs State of Kerala