Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. Madras High Court
  4. /
  5. 2017
  6. /
  7. January

Sundaravalli And Others vs City Union Bank Ltd

Madras High Court|02 August, 2017
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

The petitioner has filed the above writ petition to issue a writ of mandamus to direct the respondent-bank to permit the petitioners to withdraw the amount, which is lying in Account No.117001000017446 in the name of Shiva Shankar.
2. It is the case of the petitioners that the first petitioner's husband viz., Shiva Shankar, whose whereabouts are not known for more than seven years, had deposited money with the respondent- bank. Now, petitioners 3 and 4, who are at the age of getting married and the fifth petitioner, who is studying professional course in a private Engineering College, are in need of finance and requested the respondent-Bank to permit them to withdraw the amount lying to the credit of the abovesaid account.
3. According to the petitioners, the first petitioner's husband had deposited a sum of Rs.11 lakhs with the respondent-bank. When the petitioners' approached the respondent-bank for withdrawal of the amount deposited by Shiva Shankar, the respondent-bank refused to permit them to withdraw the said amount stating that they have to produce succession certificate obtained from a competent Court.
4. When the matter is taken up for hearing, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are willing to give the immovable property as security to withdraw the amount lying to the credit of the respondent-bank.
5. The learned counsel appearing for the respondent-Bank submits that the petitioners can withdraw the amount lying in the name of Shiva Shankar only on production of Succession Certificate issued by the competent Court.
6. Since the petitioners have stated that they are in financial need for the marriage of petitioners 3 and 4 and for the educational expenses of the fifth petitioner, I am of the view that the petitioners can be directed to mortgage the immovable property by depositing the title deeds with the respondent-bank and on getting the property mortgaged, the respondent-bank shall permit the petitioners to withdraw the amount lying in the name of Shiva Shankar in the deposit.
7. In this circumstance, taking into consideration the averments stated in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition and also the submissions made by the learned counsel on either side, the petitioners are directed to mortgage the immovable property standing in the name of the first petitioner viz., plot No.12, Old survey No.2/2, New No.2/2B and 2C, MMDA/PPD/LO No.16/88 MAV Manickam Avenue Layout, Kaspapuram Village, Tambaram Taluk, Kanceepuram District, measuring an extent of 2250 sq.ft., together with the superstructure with the respondent-bank and on mortgaging the said property, the respondent-bank is directed to permit the petitioners to withdraw the amount lying to the credit of account No. 117001000017446, within a period of one week from the date of the registration of the document for deposit of title deeds. It is also made clear that the deposit of the title deed executed by the petitioners shall be in force till the petitioners hand over a certified copy of the succession certificate to be obtained from a competent Court.
With the above observation, the writ petition is disposed of. No costs.
02.08.2017 Index:Yes/No raa M.DURAISWAMY,J.
raa W.P.No.10456 of 2017 02.08.2017
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.
Title

Sundaravalli And Others vs City Union Bank Ltd

Court

Madras High Court

JudgmentDate
02 August, 2017
Judges
  • M Duraiswamy