Disposed

Kumari Patra v. Branch Manager, Sbi, Humma Branch

Orissa HC28 Sept 2022WP(C)/38288/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Orissa disposed of a writ petition by directing the Bank of India to disburse funds from the deceased son's account to the petitioner mother, treating the father-nominee as merely a trustee who failed to apply for transfer after the son's death.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the bank to disburse the money lying in the account to the petitioner as the legal heir of the deceased son.

Kumari Patra Vs Branch Manager, Sbi, Humma Branch — Succession and Inheritance | Orissa HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

¶2

W.P.(C) No.38288 of 2021 (Through hybrid mode)

¶3

Kumari Patra

¶4

Petitioner

¶5

Mr. S.K. Dalai, Advocate

¶6

-versus-

¶7

Branch Manager, SBI, Humma Branch

¶8

…. Opposite Party

¶9

Mr. M.K. Mohapatra, Advocate

¶10

CORAM: JUSTICE ARINDAM SINHA

ORDER

Order No. 03.

28.09.2022

1. Mr. Dalai, learned advocate appears on behalf of petitioner. He submits, his client is the mother, who lost her son on 23^rd April, 2021. Disclosed as annexure-2 is legal heir certificate dated 1^st August, 2021, certifying his client to be legal heir of the deceased. He submits, the son had bank account in State Bank of India, Humma Branch. There is some money lying in the account. The account was opened about 30 years ago. The son was born on 13^th May, 1990. He was approximately two years old, when the account was opened. His father was nominee in the account. The father left petitioner more than 26 years ago, to set up residence in Jeypore on getting married to another woman. Referring to the schedule in

¶15

Page 1 of 1

¶16

// 2 //

¶17

Hindu Succession Act, 1956. He submits, the son was unmarried and therefore petitioner is the Class-I heir and the father, Class-II.

¶18

2. Mr. Mohapatra appears on behalf of the bank.

¶19

3. Text of order dated 11^th January, 2022 is reproduced below.

¶20

“1. Mr. Mohapatra, learned advocate appears on behalf of opposite party bank. He submits, account of the deceased person has nominee. The nominee is the father, husband of petitioner. That person is a necessary party. He refers to paragraph-6 in the petition. Petitioner has said that her husband is residing at Jeypore in Koraput district. Petitioner be directed to add petitioner’s husband.

¶21

2. Mr. Dalai, learned advocate appears on behalf of petitioner and submits, petitioner has stated in paragraph-6, all that she knows. She does not have address of the residence in Jeypore.

¶22

3. The bank is directed to give particulars of the nominee in the account of the deceased son of petitioner. This must be disclosed on adjourned date.

¶23

4. List on 17^th January, 2022.

¶24

5. Interim order passed earlier shall continue till next date.”

¶25

Mr. Mohapatra hands up the account documents and submits, the father was made nominee and address given is same as that of

¶26

petitioner. On query from Court he submits, the father has not

¶27

Page 2 of 3

¶28

// 3 //

¶29

applied for transfer of the money lying in the account, as nominee.

¶30

4. Court presumes husband of petitioner is aware that his son Krushna Chandra Patra died on 23^rd April, 2021. More than a year has passed since the death. During lifetime of his son he did not cause amendment in particulars of the nomination to give his present address. In the circumstances, there will be direction upon the bank to disburse the money to petitioner as the legal heir of the deceased

¶31

account holder. This is because, in any event the nominee is trustee

¶32

for the heir.
5. The writ petition is disposed of.
(Arindam Sinha)
Judge

¶33

Sks

¶34

Page 3 of 3

Kumari Patra v. Branch Manager, Sbi, Humma Branch

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kumari Patra v. Branch Manager, Sbi, Humma Branch

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

Benadikta Digal Vs State of Odisha

State and Ors. Vs Rani Construction Pv

Anupama Behera Vs Principal Secy. R and DM Dept., Khurda

M/S.Maa Tarini Medical Hall Vs State of Odisha

SBI General Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs Krishna Rice Mill

SBI General Insurance Vs Maa Samalai Rice Mill