Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Central Information Commission

Shivraya U Chalgeri vs Central Bank on 26 August, 2025

                                   के ीय सूचना आयोग
                           Central Information Commission
                                बाबा गं गनाथ माग,मुिनरका
                            Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
                               नई िद    ी, New Delhi - 110067
ि तीय अपील सं      ा / Second Appeal No. CIC/CBIND/A/2024/139765

Shivraya U Chalgeri                                             ... अपीलकता/Appellant

                                       VERSUS
                                        बनाम
CPIO: Central Bank of India,
Karnataka                                                 ... ितवादीगण/Respondents


Relevant dates emerging from the appeal:

RTI : 02.07.2024             FA        : 08.10.2024             SA     : 04.12.2024

CPIO : 30.10.2024            FAO : 30.10.2024                   Hearing : 22.08.2025


Date of Decision: 25.08.2025
                                       CORAM:
                                 Hon'ble Commissioner
                               _ANANDI RAMALINGAM
                                      ORDER

1. The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 02.07.2024 seeking information on the following points:

 My grandmother Sangamma w/o Nagappa Khandu. She has opened sb account in your branch in 2008. She expired in 2016 (a/c no. *******3324). My mother Bandamma U. Chalgeri had opened sb a/c in 1996 in your branch. She expired in July 2023 (a/c ******2608). The balance amount in the accounts of both the above was transferred to account of Ramlinga U. Chalgeri (a/c no. ******2596). The fact is that legal heirs of the above-mentioned are:

1. Shivaraya U. Chalgeri 2. Ramalinga U. Chalgeri 3. Vijay Laxmi U. Chalgeri and 4. Mahananda U. Chalgeri.

As per the law, nominee is caretaker and all the legal heirs shall be the beneficiaries.

The bone of contention is that how the bank authority transferred allthe amount to the account of Ramalinga U. Chalgeri. In this connection furnish the following information along with relevant certified documents, papers etc.:

1. Provide bank statement details of Bandamma U. Chalgeri since 1996 to July 2023.

2. Provide bank statement details of Sangamma w/o Nagappa Khandu since 2008 to 2016.

3. Provide bank statement details of Ramalinga U. Chalgeri since 1996 to 2024.

4. Provide set of documents submitted by Ramalinga U. Chalgeri for transfer of amount of Sangamma and Bandamma to his account.

2. Having not received any response from the CPIO, the Appellant filed a First Appeal on 08.10.2024.

3. The CPIO replied vide letter dated 30.10.2024 and the same is reproduced as under:-

1. As per section 8(1)(j) and section 8(1)(d) in RTI Act of 2005 CPIO is not required to furnish the details of third party.

2. As per section 8(1)(j) and section 8(1)(d) in RTI Act of 2005 CPIO is not required to furnish the details of third party.

3. As per section 8(1)(j) and section 8(1)(d) in RTI Act of 2005 CPIO is not required to furnish the details of third party.

4. As per section 8(1)(j) and section 8(1)(d) in RTI Act of 2005 CPIO is not required to furnish the details of third party.

4. The FAA vide order dated 30.10.2024 upheld the reply given by the CPIO.

5. Aggrieved with the FAA's order, the Appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal dated 04.12.2024.

6. The appellant and on behalf of the respondent Mr. Ganna Ranagappa, Regional Head, attended the hearing through video conference.

7. The appellant inter alia submitted that he had sought bank statement details of his grandmother and mother i.e late Mrs. Sangamma and late Mrs. Bandamma who expired in 2008 and 2016, respectively, and their account balance was transferred to Mr. Ramlinga, Nominee, (the appellant's brother).

8. The respondent while defending their case inter alia submitted that the information sought pertained to the third-party, disclosure of which had no relationship to any public activity or interest, hence, exemption under section 8 (1) (d) and (j) of the RTI Act has been claimed. He stated that the amount was transferred to the nominee i.e Ramlinga and he is still alive.

9. The Commission after adverting to the facts and circumstances of the case, hearing both parties and perusal of records, observes that the CPIO has provided appropriate reply to the RTI Application as per the provisions of the RTI Act vide letter dated 30.10.2024. The Commission notes that the appellant has sought for the personal information of third party, disclosure of which has no relationship to any public activity or interest. Hence, the CPIO correctly denied the information under Section 8(1) (d) & (j) of the RTI Act. In this regard, the attention of the appellant is drawn towards a judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matter of Central Public Information Officer, Supreme Court of India Vs. Subhash Chandra Agarwal in Civil Appeal No. 10044 of 2010 with Civil Appeal No. 10045 of 2010 and Civil Appeal No. 2683 of 2010 wherein the import of "personal information" envisaged under Section 8(1)(j) of RTI Act has been exemplified in the context of earlier ratios laid down by the same Court in the matter(s) of Canara Bank Vs. C.S. Shyam in Civil Appeal No.22 of 2009; Girish Ramchandra Deshpande vs. Central Information Commissioner & Ors., (2013) 1 Page 3 of 5 SCC 212 and R.K. Jain vs. Union of India & amp; Anr., (2013) 14 SCC 794. The following was thus held:

"59. Reading of the aforesaid judicial precedents, in our opinion, would indicate that personal records, including name, address, physical, mental and psychological status, marks obtained, grades and answer sheets, are all treated as personal information. Similarly, professional records, including qualification, performance, evaluation reports, ACRs, disciplinary proceedings, etc. are all personal information. Medical records, treatment, choice of medicine, list of hospitals and doctors visited, findings recorded, including that of the family members, information relating to assets, liabilities, income tax returns, details of investments, lending and borrowing, etc. are personal information. Such personal information is entitled to protection from unwarranted invasion of privacy and conditional access is available when stipulation of larger public interest is satisfied. This list is indicative and not exhaustive..."

10. In view of the above and in the absence of the larger public interest, the Commission finds no scope of intervention in the matter. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed.

Copy of the decision be provided free of cost to the parties.

Sd/-

(Anandi Ramalingam) (आनंदी रामिलंगम) Information Commissioner (सूचना आयु ) िदनांक/Date: 25.08.2025 Authenticated true copy O. P. Pokhriyal (ओ. पी. पोख रयाल) Dy. Registrar (उप पंजीयक) 011-26180514 Page 4 of 5 Addresses of the parties:

1 The CPIO Central Bank of India, Regional Office : Hubli, 2nd Floor, Akshay Chabbi Centre, Gokul Road, Hubli, Karnataka -

580030 2 Shivraya U Chalgeri Page 5 of 5 Recomendation(s) to PA under section 25(5) of the RTI Act, 2005:-

Nil Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)