IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN FRIDAY, THE 20TH JUNE 2008 / 30TH JYAISHTA 1930 WP(C).No. 7890 of 2008(L) ------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------ K.V. GOPINATHAN NAIR, S/O. VELAYUDHAN NAIR, AGED 74 YEARS, RESIDING AT KAMUKUMPALLIL HOUSE, PULIYANNOOR P.O., PALA, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.P.C.HARIDAS RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. UNION OF INDIA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY TO THE DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE, NEW DELHI. 2. STATE BANK OF INDIA, TRIPUNITHURA BRANCH, TRIPUNITHURA, REPRESENTED BY ITS BRANCH MANAGER. BY ADV. SRI.SAIGI JACOB PALATTY, CGC FOR R1 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 20/06/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: S.SIRI JAGAN, J. ================== W.P.(C).No.7890 of 2008 ================== Dated this the 20th day of June, 2008 J U D G M E N T The petitioner is the brother one late Smt.Pankajakshyamma. The said Pankajakshyamma, before her death, executed Ext.P2 registered will bequeathing all her properties, rights etc. including the amounts outstanding in the pension account No.1719996000000 and Savings Bank Account No.30001941251 with the 2nd respondent, to the the petitioner, the petitioner alleges. The petitioner's grievance now is the 2nd respondent is not paying the balance amounts lying in the said accounts to the petitioner, in spite of production of Ext.P2 Will. 2. The learned Standing Counsel appearing for the 2nd respondent bank would submit that the said late Pankajakshyamma had appointed a nominee for receipt of the amounts lying in the said accounts as also in respect of another fixed deposit with the bank, and therefore, as per their Rules, they are bound to disburse the amounts to the nominee and not to the petitioner. w.p.c.7890/08 2 3. I have heard both sides. 4. I am of opinion that now that there is a nominee, the petitioner cannot maintain this writ petition against the 2nd respondent bank. Although the petitioner would seek permission to implead the nominee also, I am not inclined to permit the same in so far as the petitioner's remedy lies in filing a suit against the said nominee for recovery of his share of the amount or whole amount, if he is entitled to. Therefore, without prejudice to such right, this writ petition is dismissed. Sd/- sdk+ S.SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE ///True copy/// P.A. to Judge