Central Information Commission
J. J. Kottouran vs State Bank Of India on 18 December, 2025
के न्द्रीय सूचना आयोग
Central Information Commission
बाबा गंगनाथ मागग,मुननरका
Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
नई दिल्ली, New Delhi - 110067
नितीय अपील संख्या / Second Appeal No. CIC/SBIND/A/2024/139494
J. J. Kottouran ... अपीलकताग/Appellant
VERSUS
बनाम
CPIO: State Bank of India,
East, Thrissur ...प्रनतवािीगण/Respondent
Relevant dates emerging from the appeal:
RTI : 28.09.2024 FA : 28.10.2024 SA : 04.12.2024
CPIO : 28.10.2024 FAO : 27.11.2024 Hearing : 16.12.2025
Date of Decision: 18.12.2025
CORAM:
Hon'ble Commissioner
_ANANDI RAMALINGAM
ORDER
1. The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 28.09.2024 seeking information on the following points:
1. "The actual date of opening of the account bearing number ******8846?
2. Whether the account was opened in the name of Mr. J J Kottouran or as a joint/partnership account?
3. If the account was opened in the name of Mr. J J Kottouran, please provide the date when it was changed in to a joint/partnership account.
4. If the account was subsequently changed into a joint/partnership account please furnish the Request, Records, Certificates, Documentation used for this Transfer."Page 1 of 4
2. The CPIO replied vide letter dated 28.10.2024 and the same is reproduced as under: -
1. "The date of opening of account No. ******8846 is 20.05.2017.
2. No, the account was opened in the name of M/s JO Agencies with proprietor Mr. J.J. Kottouran.
3. As per our branch system, the account has been converted to a partnership account. However, we require some additional time to retrieve and compile the relevant paper records.
4. As per our branch system, the account has been converted to a partnership account. However, we require some additional time to retrieve and compile the relevant paper records."
3. Having not received any response from the CPIO, the Appellant filed a First Appeal dated 28.10.2024. The FAA vide order dated 27.11.2024 upheld the reply given by the CPIO as under: -
"I am of the view that the CPIO has appropriately replied to the RTI application and there is no reason to interfere in the matter in the present appeal.
Nevertheless, as the appellant has not yet received the reply, he is entitled to approach the CPIO and obtain a copy of the reply already given as above. Further, the appellant will be at liberty to file a fresh appeal with the appellate authority if he is not satisfied with the reply given by the CPIO."
4. Aggrieved with the FAA's order, the Appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal dated 04.12.2024.
5. The Appellant was present during the hearing through video conference and on behalf of the Respondent, Ranjini R, RM & CPIO attended the hearing through video conference.
6. The Appellant stated that he has received the information and does not wish to press for any further action.
Page 2 of 47. The Commission took on record the written submissions of the CPIO dated 10.12.2025:
"6. The Appellant filed his First Appeal dated 28.10.2024 alleging non receipt of the information sought within the stipulated time frame and inter alia for directing the CPIO to furnish the requested information. The FAA disposed the appeal finding that the CPIO has appropriately replied to the RTI application. As the appellant has not received the reply, the FAA found that the appellant was entitled to approach CPIO and obtain a copy of reply already given. The FAA further reserved liberty to the appellant to file a fresh appeal with the appellate authority if he is not satisfied with the reply given by CPIO.
7. Not being satisfied with the reply furnished by CPIO and the order of the FAA, Appel-lant had approached this Hon'ble Commission to direct the Respondent to provide the information sought by him.
8. We humbly submit that vide letter dated 09-12-2025, we have updated the status of the reply dated 28-10-2024 provided to the appellant. The appellant was informed that the account was converted based on the partnership deed dated 25.10.2017 submitted and copy of the partnership deed was also provided to him. He was also submitted and copy of the partnership deed was also provided to him. He was also informed that the date of conversion of the account is not available from the system. We have taken up with the department concerned for retrieval of the date. The appellant was assured that the relevant information will be promptly communicated as soon as we receive it. The copy of the letter is produced and marked as ANNEXURE A1.
9. In this regard it is submitted that the CPIO has provided all the available information to the appellant as per the provisions of the RTI Act. As the information relating to date of transfer of the account to a joint/partnership account is not available from the rec-ords at the branch we are unable to furnish the same to the appellant. We respectfully submit before this Hon'ble Commission that the said information will be provided to the appellant as and when we receive the same."Page 3 of 4
8. The Commission in view of the Appellant's prayer closes the case. The Appeal is disposed of accordingly.
Copy of the decision be provided free of cost to the parties.
Sd/-
(Anandi Ramalingam) (आनंिी रामललंगम) Information Commissioner (सूचना आयुक्त) दिनांक/Date: 18.12.2025 Authenticated true copy O. P. Pokhriyal (ओ. पी. पोखररयाल) Dy. Registrar (उप पंजीयक) 011-26180514 Addresses of the parties:
1 The CPIO State Bank of India, CPIO, Regional Business Office-2, Thrissur, 3rd Floor, Geentanjali, Paramekkavu Devaswom Building, Round, East, Thrissur- 680001 2 J. J. Kottouran Page 4 of 4 Recomendation(s) to PA under section 25(5) of the RTI Act, 2005:-
Nil Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)