SOMPALLI VISWESWARA NAIDU vs MANAGER, STATE BANK OF INDIA

THE appellant''s father had a locker in the State Bank of India, Kavali. He died on 7.1.1988 leaving behind him, his wife, two married daughters and the appellant. O.S. No. 53 of 1989 was filed by the sisters claiming a share. Subsequently, it was compromised whereby the sisters have relinquished their share and sisters have also informed the bank on 22.9.1989 and 27.9.1989 stating that they have relinquished their shares. It was, thereafter, a notice was sent to the Bank on 30.12.1989 by the appellant stating that certain promissory notes will be time barred, unless the locker is opened and the promissory notes were handed over. On 6.2.1990 an inventory of articles was taken, on 18.9.1989 and 4.1.90 on behalf of the appellant, notices were issued asking the bank to permit the appellant to operate the locker. To the said notices a reply was sent on 16.4.1990 by the Bank stating that the appellant has been promising to produce some authenticated documents from the Court to prove his status as the sole person entitled to the contents of the locker of his deceased father and the appellant as well as his brother-in-law were also appraised of the necessity of complying with the bank of all formalities. Subsequently, the consumer dispute was filed before the District Forum, Nellore for a direction to the bank to deliver all the inventories articles to the appellant and also to pay a sum of Rs. 50,000/-in respect of the debit-bonds which got time barred on account of the refusal of the Bank to deliver the same. THE District Forum ordered the return of National Savings Certificates and Indira Vikas Patras to the petitioner without any indemnity bond as and when the appellant appears. It further held, that the questions as to whether the Bank is liable to pay the damages towards the value of the time barred debts or interest due on matured fixed deposits etc., were kept open and the appellant herein is at liberty to agitate the same in a Civil Court.

AGGRIEVED by the same, the above appeal was preferred. It is contended by Mr. Krishna Reddy, the learned Counsel for the appellant that after the disposal of the suit and the relinquishment of rights by their sisters, the Bank should have handed over the contents of the locker and directed the appellant to operate the locker. We are not inclined to agree. That though the suit filed by the sisters was disposed of, the appellant herein did not produce any succession or legal heir certificate to enable him to operate the locker. The District Forum, therefore, rightly directed the return of National Savings Certificates and Indira Vikas Patras. We consider that the District Forum is also right in its view that so far as damages for the time barred debts, or interest due on matured fixed deposits, the appellant has to approach the Civil Court. In the result, the appeal is dismissed. No order as to costs. Appeal dismissed.