Court No. - 36 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 39321 of 2010 Petitioner :- Smt. Charu Prabha Respondent :- State Of U.P. And Others Petitioner Counsel :- Sheshadri Trivedi Respondent Counsel :- C.S.C.,Suresh C. Srivastava Hon'ble Sheo Kumar Singh,J.
Hon’ble Rajesh Chandra,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Suresh C. Srivastava,
learned Advocate who appears for the bank.
Petitioner claims to be nominee of Omkar Nath Chauhan in the
account with the respondent bank.
On the death of Omkar Nath Chauhan claim of the petitioner for
payment of the amount which is lying with the bank was refused on the
ground that some matter/dispute is pending in the court.
When the writ petition was filed it transpired taht some suit has been
filed by some of the claimant much after claim which was lodged by
the petitioner and their name is not in the nominee clause.
When the counsel for the bank was directed to obtain instruction the
Bank Manager has filed an affidavit in which it has been stated that by
mistake payment to the petitioner is denied and that is regretted and
now bank is ready to pay the amount to the petitioner.
In view of the aforesaid assurance and statement as made in the
affidavit from the side of the bank, we are not to issue a writ as prayed
and this Court expect that needful is to be done within shortest
possible time preferably within a period of three weeks from the date of
receipt of certified copy of this order.
It is made clear that in view of the dispute between the petitioner and
the other claimants in respect to the right to money or other properties
this will not be treated to be something binding on anybody and it is for
every concerned to have the adjudication about their rights before the
competent court in the competent proceedings as and when it is
required.
Writ petition is accordingly disposed of.
Order Date :- 28.7.2010
Sachdeva