Telangana High Court
WP/45592/2016 of Munawar Sultana Siddiqui Vs The Union of India on 30 December 2016
RAJA ELANGO WRIT PETITION No.45592 of 2016 ORDER: This Writ Petition, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, is filed by the petitioner seeking to declare the action 2nd respondent in refusing either to deposit the cash of Rs.3,63,000/-, available in locker No.49, in an account or to
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
Arguments
HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAJA ELANGO
WRIT PETITION No.45592 of 2016
ORDER:
This Writ Petition, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, is filed by the petitioner seeking to declare the action 2[nd] respondent in refusing either to deposit the cash of Rs.3,63,000/ -, available in locker No.49, in an account or to substitute the same with new currency to save the same from demonetization, as illegal and arbitrary, and consequently, direct the 2[nd] respondent to save the said amount from demonetization.
Heard and perused the material available on record.
The case of the petitioner is that her father-in-law secured locker No.49 in the 2[nd] respondent Bank. He died on 11.07.2011 leaving behind him the petitioner and her two sons as his legal representatives. After the death of her father-in-law, the petitioner approached the 2[nd ]respondent Bank to open the locker and the 2[nd] respondent opened the locker and conducted inventory in the presence of witnesses and the same was reduced into writing. The locker contains cash of Rs.3,63,000/ - (1000 x 363) and 11 items of gold articles. For claiming the said amount by the petitioner, the bank authorities asked her to get succession certificate. Therefore, she is taking steps to get the succession certificate. Meanwhile, the Union of India has changed the money circulation policy & implemented demonetiztaion while banning Rs.1,000 and 500 notes. Hence, she filed the present writ petition.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner requested the bank authorities to deposit the said amount in an account as a fixed deposit, since due to demonetization, if the said amount is not deposited in the Bank, the same will not have any value. He further submitted that even though some disputes are pending between the petitioner and the 2[nd] respondent, deposit of the said amount by way of fixed deposit in the bank, will not cause any prejudice to the petitioner or to the 2[nd] respondent. He further submitted that he bearer of the 2[nd] respondent is also appeared before this Court.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioner, this Court is inclined to pass the following order:
The 2[nd] respondent is permitted to open locker No.49 and deposit the amount of Rs.3,63,000/ - (Rupees three lakhs and sixty three thousand only) of old notes, which are available in the locker, in the fixed deposit either in the name of the petitioner or in the name of the Bank itself till the claim against the said amount is settled. The office bearer of the 2[nd] respondent, who appeared before this Court, is directed to communicate this order to the authorities concerned, immediately, since the last date for conversion of old notes being 30.12.2016.
Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. Consequently, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed.
______________
RAJA ELANGO, J
December 30, 2016. KTL