Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

10. The non-obstante clause mentioned in Sub-section (2) and the word 'right' mentioned therein intend to mean that in absence of any determination of right in favour of third party by any competent Court of law the nominee is entitled to get and assert its all rights. Actually this Section really protects the Bank from risk arising out of liability in case of payment being made to the nominee, but such nomination and payment made under this Section do not affect the right or claim of any other person in connection with the money deposited with the Bank meaning thereby lawful claimant's right is saved from the purview of the said sub-section. In order to understand the true effect and meaning of the word "right" mentioned in Sub-section (2) of Section 45ZA it has to be read along with proviso of Section 45ZB and that of Sub-section (4) of Section 45ZA which have protected the right of any lawful person who can establish by obtaining a decree, order or certificate from a Court of competent jurisdiction or other authority. In the event any such decree, order or certificate is produced the Bank obviously will not handover the money to the nominee meaning thereby efficacy of nomination of the deceased depositor stand extinguished the moment decree, order or certificate of the Civil Court is produced by any person, naturally the Bank is bound to obey the Court's order. I therefore grant same relief as has been done by my learned Brother, affirming the decree but not the reasoning recorded by the learned Trial Judge.

35. According to the appellant, the Supreme Court's construction was based primarily on Section 39(6) of the Insurance Act. In matters pertaining to bank deposits. Section 45ZA of the Banking Regulation Act, 1949 would apply. According to the appellant, the non-obstante clause in Sub-section (2) of Section 45ZA of the Banking Regulation Act, 1949 (the said Act of 1949) would indicate that it was the nominee, and the nominee alone, who would be entitled to receive and enjoy the benefits of bank deposits.

39. In isolation, such argument is attractive but it is the purpose of such provision that has to be ascertained. Just as Section 39 of the Insurance Act, Section 45ZA of the said Act of 1949 is essentially to provide for the discharge of the bank's obligation. The entirety of Section 45ZA and the provision that follows it in the said Act of 1949, Section 45ZB, have to be taken into consideration. Section 45ZB reads thus:

45B. Notice of claims of other persons regarding deposits not receivable.- No notice of the claim of any person, other than the person or persons in whose name a deposit is held by a banking company, shall be receivable by the banking company, nor shall the banking company be bound by any such notice though even expressly given to it:

42. Apart from the avowed purpose of the said Act of 1949. Section 45ZA appearing in Part-III-B, which was incorporated by an amending Act of 1984, is restricted in its operation. Such provision does not, as the Act in which it appears cannot, direct the fate of the assets of a deceased constituent or depositor. It only limits the obligation and liability of the bank.

43. Sub-section (1) of Section 45ZA defines a nominee. The nominee is such person to whom the amount of deposit may be returned by the banking company. Sub-section (2) confers the exclusive right on the nominee to receive the amount of deposit. The provisions are concerned with the return and the receipt of the deposit. As to what happens to the monies upon the return and receipt being completed, is not governed by these provisions as they are beyond the pale of the Act.