Mary Edward vs The Manager on 18 August, 2009

       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C).No. 9578 of 2008(M)


1. MARY EDWARD, AGED 70 YEARS,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. THE MANAGER,
                       ...       Respondent

2. FREDINANT EDWARD, S/O.B.C.EDWARD,

                For Petitioner  :SRI.J.JAYAKUMAR

                For Respondent  :SRI.V.G.ARUN

The Hon'ble MR. Justice S.SIRI JAGAN

 Dated :18/08/2009

 O R D E R
                               S.SIRI JAGAN, J.
                       ==================
                          W.P(C).No.9578 of 2008
                       ==================
                Dated this the 18th day of August, 2009

                               J U D G M E N T

Shri.Nagaraj Narayanan takes notice on behalf of the 2nd

respondent.

2. The petitioner is a widow aged 70 years. Her husband,

B.C.Edward, while he was alive, deposited with the 1st respondent

certain amounts as fixed deposit with FD receipt No.155/1997-98 in

the joint names of the petitioner and the 2nd respondent, which has to

be paid to either or the survivor. Sri.Edward died on 18.9.2000. The

FD account matured in the year 2001. The 2nd respondent, who is the

son of the petitioner’s husband in his first marriage, is in possession of

the fixed deposit receipt. He is not amenable to withdrawing the

amount by both amicably. Therefore, the petitioner filed a succession

O.P. which was dismissed as not maintainable, since the amount is not

kept in the name of late Edward. It is under the above circumstances,

the petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking the following reliefs:

“(i). issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate Writ, Order or
direction, directing the 1st respondent to pay the = amount in F.D.
No.155/1997-98 with interest from the date of deposit till the date
of payment, as stated in Ext.P2 letter issued by the 1st respondent,
forthwith;

and

(ii). grant such other relief that this Hon’ble Court deem fit and proper
in the circumstances of the case.”

3. The counsel for the 2nd respondent now submits that the

2

2nd respondent is ready to amicably settle the matter by sharing the

fixed deposit amount equally between the petitioner and the 2nd

respondent. The petitioner also agrees to the said course of action.

The 1st respondent has no objection for the same. But he insists on

production of the FD receipt. In the above circumstances, this writ

petition is disposed of with the following directions:

The 2nd respondent shall produce the FD receipt before the 1st

respondent within one week along with a certified copy of this

judgment on receipt of which, the Bank shall disburse the amounts in

the fixed deposit with interest up to the date to the petitioner and the

2nd respondent in equal shares under proper receipt. The 1st

respondent-Manager shall issue two cheques to the petitioner and the

2nd respondent for 50 per cent each of the amounts due under the

fixed deposit, within one week from the date of production of the FD

receipt. If the 2nd respondent is unable to produce the fixed deposit

receipt, the 1st respondent shall obtain indemnity bonds from the

petitioner as well as the 2nd respondent.

Sd/-

sdk+                                               S.SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE

          ///True copy///




                               P.A. to Judge

3