JUDGMENT
S. Dwivedi, J.
1. The petitioner has preferred this petition under articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India seeking a direction against the respondent to permit him to withdraw the deposited amount from Savings Bank Account No. 5866 and to direct the payment of interest at the rate of 12 per cent. per annum.
2. The petitioner and his deceased father had a joint savings bank account with the respondent. At the end of August, 1989, the petitioner’s father died. The petitioner contends that after the death of his father, when he tried to withdraw the amount, he was required to submit a letter of indemnity and a declaration on oath, but despite the petitioner’s furnishing the required documents, he was not permitted to withdraw the amount. The petitioner had therefore, served the respondent with a notice dated March 18, 1993, but with no response ; hence this petition.
3. The respondent having filed the return, has submitted that the petitioner himself had filed an application to the respondent requesting to continue the bank account as the amounts standing in the name of his father at different places in different accounts were to be received in that account. It is contended that on the petitioner’s prayer, the account was not closed by the respondent, else under the Bank Rules, after the death of any of the joint account holders, the account is to be closed. The application filed by the petitioner with the respondent has also been placed on record as annexure R-1.
4. It is contended by the bank that after submitting the application, as contained in annexure R-1, the petitioner never requested the bank to close the account and to make the payment of the deposited amount. On the petitioner’s serving the respondent with the notice dated March 18, 1993, the respondent-bank had informed him on March 19, 1993, that he should contact the respondent with the pass book of the account so that the joint account which was earlier instructed by him not to be closed,
may be closed, but it is submitted by the bank that the petitioner did not contact the respondent-bank and has mala fide filed this petition on frivolous grounds. Therefore, it is prayed by the respondent that the petition
be dismissed and exemplary costs be awarded.
5. I have considered the contentions advanced. Annexure R-1 is the application filed by the petitioner himself wherein he had requested the respondent not to close the bank account. Thereafter, the petitioner is not stated to have filed any other application to the bank. The respondent-bank had informed the petitioner to contact the respondent with the savings bank account pass book so that the account may be closed. The respondent-bank had despatched this letter, as contained in annexure R-2, to the petitioner at his given address, through registered post. The respondent has filed the photo copy of the envelope (annexure R-3) which had contained the letter annexure R-2. The envelope was returned by the postal authorities to the respondent, without service, as the petitioner was not available at the given address. The respondent-bank has also produced the unopened original envelope in the court. It is submitted that the respondent-bank has been ready and willing to make the payment of the amount to the petitioner with its accrued interest permissible under the Rules, provided the petitioner approaches the bank for the payment thereof.
6. From the documents on record, no fault can be found with the respondent and the petitioner has to blame himself for the non-closure of the bank account. No negligence or any arbitrariness is disclosed on the part of the respondent-bank. The respondent-bank had followed the instructions issued by its customer, i.e., the petitioner, in not closing the said account and after the service of the petitioner’s notice, the bank had informed him to approach the respondent with the bank pass book, but the petitioner failed to take steps in that regard, Therefore, the petitioner in the circumstances and on the submissions of the respondent, based on documents, is not entitled to the enhanced interest or to get any other relief in this petition.
7. In view of the above, the petition is dismissed, but in the facts and circumstances, there shall be no orders as to costs.