Bombay High Court
Jawaharlal Lachhmandas Chandani vs Sanjay Hari Nagpal And Anr on 12 September, 2018
Author: G.S. Patel
Bench: G.S. Patel
26-NMT171-18.DOC
Atul
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
TESTAMENTARY AND INTESTATE JURISDICTION
NOTICE OF MOTION NO. 171 OF 2018
IN
NOTICE OF MOTION NO. 118 OF 2018
IN
TESTAMENTARY PETITION NO. 213 OF 2015
Jawaharlal Lachhmandas Chandani ...Plaintif
Versus
Sanjay Hari Nagpal & Anr ...Defendants
Mr BG Saraf, for the Plaintiff.
Mr Nitesh V Bhutekar, for Defendant No. 1-Applicant.
CORAM: G.S. PATEL, J
DATED: 12th September 2018
PC:-
1. The Notice of Motion is filed by the original 1st Defendant
and seeks to recall my order dated 13th June 2018 on the Plaintif's
Notice of Motion No. 118 of 2018 (pages 9 and 10). This is how that
order reads:
"1. A copy of the Motion is served on the learned
Advocate for the 2nd Defendant in Court today. The
Respondent, Central Bank of India was served on 11th June
2018. The only reliefs sought in the Motion is against the Central Bank of India to deposit certain balances lying to Page 1 of 4 12th September 2018 ::: Uploaded on - 14/09/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 15/09/2018 01:05:57 ::: 26-NMT171-18.DOC the credit of accounts mentioned in prayer clause (a) with the Prothonotary and Senior Master. There is no conceivable prejudice to the Defendants caused by granting this relief, since there is no order being made permitting withdrawal of any of the amounts.
2. The Motion is made absolute in terms of prayer clause (a). The Central Bank of India will act on production of an authenticated copy of the order.
3. On receipt of the amount the Prothonotary and Senior Master will invest the amounts in Fixed Deposit in his name at the best available rates of interest which may also include with the Central Bank of India etc. The investment will be initially for one year.
4. The Motion is disposed of in these terms. No costs."
2. What I am told in the present Notice of Motion borders on the incredible. Apart from making all manner of irrelevant allegations against the Plaintif, the Defendants say that they were advised by the Central Bank of India in its Khar (West) Branch, that since an account was held by the deceased in his name and to which one or more of the Defendants were nominees, and since this account had not been operated for some time, therefore, under Section 45ZA(2) of the Banking Regulation Act, 1949, the entire balance in that account could lawfully be "transferred" to the personal accounts of Defendants Nos. 1 and 2, as being entirely without any sort of liability to those Defendants. It is difficult to conceive of anything more than utterly wrong-headed and contrary to settled law as to the status of nominees in relation to estates and heirs. The bank may have got itself a quittance, but as between these two Defendants and the heirs entitled to the amounts in law, the Page 2 of 4 12th September 2018 ::: Uploaded on - 14/09/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 15/09/2018 01:05:57 ::: 26-NMT171-18.DOC bank could not possibly have purported to advise those Defendants that they bore no liability or responsibility to the accounts so received in their hands. They remained, and still remain, entirely accountable for those finally found by the court (not the bank) to the estate of the deceased; and the nomination in no way serves either as a testamentary instrument or as an additional mode of testamentary disposition.
3. On 8th March 2018, the Bank wrote to Mr Saraf for the Plaintif and this prompted him to file Notice of Motion No. 118 of 2018 on which I made the order of 13th June 2018.
4. The Defendants say that they acted bona fide on the belief and understanding that they have received correct legal advice from the Central Bank of India; that is to say, that the amount was legally theirs to do with as they pleased. They were wrong, and the advice they received was wholly incorrect. The bank and its legal department had no business rendering such legal advice. At best, the bank could have flagged the account as dormant and let matters rest at that.
5. There is yet an amount lying to the credit of the account of the deceased, Gopal Nagpal, with the Central Bank of India and this includes PPF, SCSS and fixed deposits.
(a) Any and all balance(s) that is/are currently held by the Central Bank of India in the name of the deceased will be deposited in this Court by the Branch Manager of Page 3 of 4 12th September 2018 ::: Uploaded on - 14/09/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 15/09/2018 01:05:57 ::: 26-NMT171-18.DOC the Central Bank of India, Khar (West) Branch, no later than 19th September 2018.
(b) The Branch Manager will act on production of an authenticated copy of this order. Any failure to comply will be viewed as an act of contempt and I will proceed against the Branch Manager if this order is not complied with.
6. Of the amount transferred to the 1st and 2nd Defendants in the circumstances set out above, these Defendants say they have utilized some portion of that. An amount of Rs. 30 lakhs is yet readily available. They will deposit the amount of Rs. 30 lakhs in this Court on or before 19th September 2018.
7. I am leaving open all contentions in regard to the balance said to have been utilized by the Defendants. This will also be subject to final adjustment in the course of administration of the estate, dependent on the outcome of the Testamentary Suit. All contentions in that behalf are left open.
8. The Notice of Motion is kept pending for compliance and will be listed on the supplementary board on 21st September 2018.
(G. S. PATEL, J) Page 4 of 4 12th September 2018 ::: Uploaded on - 14/09/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 15/09/2018 01:05:57 :::