IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No 5857 of 2009 Seva Dharma Sansthan, N-36, Professor’s Colony, Chitragupta Nagar, Kankarbagh, P S - Patrakar Nagar, District - Patna through its Secretary Kumar Nirad, son of Shri Ramesh Chandra Sahay, resident of N-36, Professor’s Colony, Chitragupta Nagar, Kankarbagh, P S - Patrakar Nagar, District - Patna - Petitioner Versus 1. The State Bank of India, Corporate Centre, Madam Cama Road, Nariman Point, Mumbai - 400 021 through its Chairman 2. The Chief General Manager, State Bank of India, Administrative Building, West Gandhi Maidan, P S - Gandhi Maidan, District - Patna 3. The General Manager, State Bank of India, Administrative Building, West Gandhi Maidan, P S - Gandhi Maidan, District - Patna 4. The Assistant General Manager, State Bank of India, Administrative Building, West Gandhi Maidan, P S - Gandhi Maidan, District - Patna 5. The Regional Manager, Region - I, State Bank of India, Judges Court Road, Patna 6. The Branch Manager, State Bank of India, Main Branch, West Gandhi Maidan, P S - Gandhi Maidan, District - Patna - Respondents *** For the petitioner : M/s Naresh Kumar Malhotra & Binod Kumar Sinha, Advocates For the S B I : M/s Kaushlendra Kumar Sinha & Sunil Kumar Singh, Advocates *** 3 21.05.2009 The petitioner is an NGO and had an account with the State Bank of India, Patna Main Branch. The account is operated by the President/Secretary who are the authorized signatories and documents have to be signed by any of the two. Recently, the President has been removed by a resolution duly adopted by the Management and replaced by another. This resolution was furnished to the Bank. Thereafter, the Bank started honouring the cheques but then the so-called removed President approached the Bank with the certificate granted by the Registrar of Societies under the Societies Registration Act showing that he continued to be the President of the Society as per records of the Registrar. This created a bona fide apprehension in the mind of the 2 Bank about correctness of the resolution earlier submitted. It, accordingly, stopped the Bank account. This has prompted the petitioner to come to this Court. Mr Naresh Kumar Malhotra furnishes the resolution afresh and admits that the resolution of the Society removing the earlier President and replacing him by a new person was in fact forgotten to be sent to the Registrar of Societies. That has now been done and the change has been incorporated with the Registrar of Societies. On behalf of Bank, it is rightly submitted that if that is so then the petitioner should immediately get a copy of the list of office bearers as appearing with the Registrar of Societies as on today and furnish the same to the Bank. If that shows the changed membership then the Bank would permit operation of accounts. Otherwise there being a dispute inter party, they must get the same resolved before operation of accounts can be permitted. In my view, the suggestion of the Bank is correct and based on the said suggestion, the writ petition is being disposed of. Petitioner agrees to obtain necessary information from the Registrar of Societies and furnish it to the Bank immediately. On the same being furnished to the Bank, Bank would permit the new Management to sign the cheque in accordance with law. On petitioner’s applying the Registrar of Societies for necessary information, the same would be supplied to the petitioner within one week of the application in accordance with law. This disposes of the writ petition. M.E.H./ (Navaniti Prasad Singh) 3