Bmo Trust Company vs State Bank Of India & Anr on 31 May, 2021

[Cites 1, Cited by 1]

Delhi High Court - Orders

Bmo Trust Company vs State Bank Of India & Anr on 31 May, 2021

Bench: Prateek Jalan

                          $~26
                          *    IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

                          +      W.P.(C) 5619/2021

                                 BMO TRUST COMPANY                                   ..... Petitioner
                                             Through:            Mr. Rajshekhar Rao, Sr. Advocate,
                                                                 Mr. Kartik Sundar & Ms. Amrita
                                                                 Tiwari, Advocates

                                                            versus

                                 STATE BANK OF INDIA & ANR.              ..... Respondents
                                              Through: Mr. S.L. Gupta, Advocate with
                                                        Mr. Aditya Vikram Gupta,
                                                        Advocate for R-1/SBI

                          CORAM:
                          HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRATEEK JALAN

                                              ORDER

% 31.05.2021 The proceedings in the matter have been conducted through video conferencing.

CM APPL. 17509-17510/2021 (exemption) Exemptions allowed, subject to all just exceptions. The applications are disposed of.

W.P.(C) 5619/2021

1. Issue notice with regard to prayers (a) and (b) of the writ petition. Mr. S.L. Gupta, learned counsel, accepts notice on behalf of respondent no. 1-State Bank of India.

Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed W.P.(C) 5619/2021 Page 1 of 2 By:SHITU NAGPAL Signing Date:01.06.2021 09:40:55

2. The principal issue to be decided in this petition is whether the petitioner is entitled to access the savings bank account of late Mrs. Fleurette Mehta, as claimed in the writ petition. The question of remittance of the money with the approval of the Reserve Bank of India ["RBI"] does not arise at this stage. Notice is therefore not issued on prayer (c) at this stage, and the RBI is not required.

3. The contention of Mr. Rajshekhar Rao, learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner, is that the petitioner, as trustee of the will of Mrs. Mehta dated 01.08.2017, has obtained the probate thereof from the competent court in the State of Ontario, Canada. He contends that the petitioner is not required to obtain further probate/ letters of administration with the will annexed in India and is entitled to proceed on the basis of the probate granted by the Canadian Court. For this purpose, Mr. Rao relies upon the judgment of the Supreme Court in Sameer Kapoor And Anr. vs. State Through Sub-Division Magistrate South, New Delhi And Ors., (2020) 12 SCC 480 and the judgment of a coordinate bench of this Court in Dr. Sanjay Khanduja vs. Punjab National Bank & Anr. [W.P.(C) 1402/2021, decided on 12.02.2021], in support of his case.

4. Counter affidavit may be filed within six weeks. Rejoinder thereto, if any, may be filed within two weeks thereafter.

5. List on 04.08.2021.

PRATEEK JALAN, J MAY 31, 2021 'hkaur' Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed W.P.(C) 5619/2021 Page 2 of 2 By:SHITU NAGPAL Signing Date:01.06.2021 09:40:55

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Delhi High Court - Orders