SUMA DEVI Vs. SUB TREASURY OFFICER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONER has approached this Court for a direction to the 1st respondent to disburse the amount due as per Ext. P2 on the basis of Ext. P3 nomination certificate.

(2.) EXT . P2 is a fixed deposit receipt which was in the name of the petitioner's husband, who expired, and the fixed deposit had matured. The petitioner is the nominee as seen from Ext. P3. The complaint of the petitioner is that despite such nomination, the 1st respondent is not paying the fixed deposit amount to the petitioner. Petitioner has also sought for disbursal of the interest @ 10.5% from the date on which the fixed deposit had become due.

(3.) THE law is well settled that the nominee is entitled to receive the amount on behalf of the legal heirs as a trustee and it is the obligation of the nominee who receives the amount to disburse the same to the legal heirs. As far as the 1st respondent is concerned, he cannot insist that all the legal heirs as shown in the succession certificate should come forward to receive the amount. If at all there is any dispute with reference to disbursement of the amount covered by the fixed deposit, it is for the legal heirs to approach the competent court of law and seek appropriate remedies.