High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCWP/26926/2015dismissed

Bharat Bhushan Singla v. State Bank Of India And ORS

2016-01-28Mr. Justice R.P. Nagrath2 pages

KUMAR MANOJ 2016.02.06 12:38 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP No.26926 of 2015 #1#

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND

HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP No.26926 of 2015 Date of Order: 28.01.2016 Bharat Bhushan Singla ....Petitioner

Versus

State Bank of India and Ors.

...Respondents

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR JAIN

Present:

Mr. D.R. Bansal, Advocate for the petitioner. RAKESH KUMAR JAIN, J Petitioner has assailed the validity of order dated 05.11.2015 passed by the Permanent Lok Adalat for Public Utility Services, Kaithal.

The only grievance of the petitioner is that the Bank Manager did not nominate the daughter of his deceased wifeKamlesh Aggarwal and did not release the amount of `10000/- from the other account as requested by him.

This aspect has been fairly dealt with by the Lok Adalat in the following manner:

"However, first of all, Kamlesh Aggarwal in whose name FDR stood was the best person to stage as to whether she made a request to Branch Manager for nominating her daughter as a nominee. Then we

CWP No.26926 of 2015 #2# don't find any reason as to why Branch Manager would refuse to nominate a particular person of the depositor as it is the wish of the depositor to nominate any person he/she wants. Then we also don't find any reason as to why the Branch Manager not release sum of Rs.10,000/- on demand from other account of the applicant. Now any Manager will not refuse to disburse the amount from the account, it can be legally withdrawn by the depositor. Hence the application cannot be allowed. Hence rejected. Award is hereby passed under Section 22C (8). File be consigned after due compliance."

After hearing learned counsel for the petitioner and examining the record, I am of the considered opinion that there is no error in the order of the Lok Adalat, warranting interference by this Court, in exercise of powers under Article 226 of the Constitution.

Dismissed.

January 28, 2016 (RAKESH KUMAR JAIN) manoj JUDGE