IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR WEDNESDAY, THE 24TH MARCH 2010 / 3RD CHAITHRA 1932 WP(C).No. 33893 of 2009(F) --------------------------------------- PETITIONER/PLAINTIFF: ------------------------------------ SURESH BABU, AGED 39 YEARS, S/O.LATE GOVINDAN, MULLAKAL HOUSE, THRIKKANAPATHIYARAM DESOM, CHITTANDA VILLAGE, TALAPPILLY TALUK, THRISSUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. MR.P.RADHAKRISHNAN, MR.MADHU RADHAKRISHNAN, MR.M.D.JOSEPH. RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- 1. THE MANAGER, CANARA BANK, WADAKKANCHERY BRANCH, THRISSUR DISTRICT. 2. REGIONAL MANAGER, CANARA BANK, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY CHIEF SECRETARY. R1& R2 BY ADV. MR.P.GOPINATH. R3 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER MR.M.A. ASIF. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 24/03/2010,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C) NO. 33893/2009-F APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1: COPY OF THE WILL 16/1999 OF WADAKKANCHERY SUB REGISTRY EXECUTED BY LATE GOVINDAN. EXT.P2: COPY OF THE PLAINT O.S.160/2009 FILED BEFORE THE MUNSIFF COURT, WADAKKANCHERY. EXT.P3: COPY OF THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE IN O.S.160/1999. EXT.P4: COPY OF THE LEGAL NOTICE ISSUED BY THE PETITIONER TROUGH HIS LAWYER TO THE 1ST AND 2ND RESPONDENTS. EXT.P5: COPY OF THE REPLY NOTICE ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT THROUGH HIS LAWYER. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL //TRUE COPY// P.S. TO JUDGE rs. T.R. Ramachandran Nair, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P.(C) No.33893 of 2009-F - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 24th day of March, 2010. JUDGMENT The petitioner is the son of late Govindan who had a savings bank account with the first respondent Bank. He expired on 11.1.2009 leaving behind his wife, Prabhavathi and children, apart from the petitioner, as legal heirs. Ext.P1 is the copy of the registered will executed by late Govindan and as per the terms of the will, all the movable and immovable properties shall be vested with the petitioner, after his death. 2. It is the case of the petitioner that after his death, there was some dispute regarding the sharing of properties and when the petitioner approached the first respondent, he was directed to get a decree from a court or get a probated will for the bank to process the claim. The petitioner has filed O.S. No.160/2009 before the Munsiff's Court, Wadakkancherry for a declaration that all the properties of the deceased Govindan belonged to the petitioner as per will No.16/1999 and for a permanent prohibitory injunction restraining the other legal heirs of the deceased Govindan from obstructing the plaintiff from possessing and enjoying the property. Ext.P2 is the copy of the plaint. The suit was wpc 33893/2009 2 declared ex-parte and Ext.P3 is the copy of the judgment. 3. Thereafter, the petitioner produced Ext.P3 before the first respondent for appropriate action. Even thereafter, the demand for probated will continued and the petitioner therefore sent Ext.P4 legal notice and Ext.P5 is the reply given by the Bank in the matter. 4. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel appearing for the Bank. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the terms of the will are plain and clear and in the light of the decree passed by the Munsiff's Court, the Bank cannot refuse to act upon the same. A reading of Ext.P3 shows that the suit was filed by the petitioner against the other legal heirs and it was decreed ex-parte on 31.7.2009. The terms of the decree are as follows: “1. It is hereby declared that the properties of deceased Govindan belonged to the plaintiff as per will deed No.16/99 of Wadakkancherry, SRO; 2. Defendants 2 to 4 are restrained by a decree of permanent prohibitory injunction from obstructing the plaintiff from possessing and enjoying the property; and 3. the parties shall suffer their respective costs.” 5. Therefore, there is a declaration with regard to the properties of late Govindan in favour of the petitioner herein, that too as per the will produced by him. Further, the respondents therein are permanently wpc 33893/2009 3 prohibited from obstructing the plaintiff from possessing and enjoying the properties. What is mentioned in the statement filed by the first respondent is that the decree pertains only to the immovables and no specific mention has been made about the movables and the funds with the Bank. The said contention cannot survive in the light of the specific terms of the decree and the will also. The prayers in the suit relate to movable and immovable properties covered by the will. Therefore, the petitioner is entitled for the movable and immovable assets of the deceased. The petitioner has filed a further affidavit on 28.1.2010 stating that there is no appeal against the decree filed by any of the defendants. It is also mentioned that the period for filing of the appeal is also over. In that view of the matter, if the petitioner produces a certified copy of the will before the Bank, in accordance with the terms of the decree and the terms of the will, the Bank will take steps to release the amount lying in the savings bank account of late Govindan, within a period of three weeks from the date of production of a copy of this judgment. The writ petition is disposed of as above. No costs. (T.R. Ramachandran Nair, Judge.) kav/