Sanjit Samanta v. Union Bank Of India And ORS.

29.07.2024 Sl. No.10(DL) srm W.P.A. No. 20476 of 2022 Sri Sanjit Samanta

Versus

The Union Bank of India & Ors.

Mr. Bidyut Kumar Halder, Mr. Indranil Halder ...for the Petitioner.

The petitioner contends that the Branch Manager, Union Bank of India, Barul Branch, did not disburse the amount which was lying in the name of his deceased father, namely, late Banshi Chandra Samanta. The petitioner contends that Banshi Chandra Samanta died on May 9, 2022. He was an employee of Shyama Prasad Mukherjee Port erstwhile Kolkata Port Trust.

It is contended that the money in the savings bank account as also in the fixed deposits were still lying in the name of the deceased. It also appears that Smt. Tilaka Samanta (widow) was one of the heirs.

This Court finds that the application made before the Branch Manager, Union Bank of India, Barul Branch, does not disclose any details with regard to the alleged fixed deposits, the savings bank account, etc. The petitioner is granted liberty to make a further application with details.

It is alleged that the widow (mother) had retained all the documents. It is also stated that the petitioner as an heir is entitled to some money.

This Court is not in a position to ascertain whether the contentions of the petitioner are correct or not. The bank may only initimate the petitioner whether money is lying in the bank in the name of the deceased father and whether the nominee has been handed over such amounts. The details will be provided.

If any application is made by the petitioner with details and with the death certificate, the Branch Manager of Union Bank of India, Barul Branch, will supply such relevant information with regard to the queries to be made by the petitioner.

The right of the petitioner to such amount etc. is subject to the laws of the land and the banking rules. The bank will supply such information within three months from receipt of the petitioner's application. Upon receipt of such query, the bank will also intimate the matter to the respondent No.3, who shall also be heard. In case the money is still lying with the bank, the petitioner will be intimated accordingly as to the fate of such accounts.

The writ petition is, thus, disposed of.

There shall be no order as to costs.

Parties are directed to act on the basis of the server copy of this order.

(Shampa Sarkar, J.)