DALAVAYI NAGARAJAMMA Vs. STATE BANK OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an appeal directed by the 1st defendant against the judgment and decree of the District Judge of Cuddapah decreeing a sum of Rs. 6092-9-0 in favour of the 3rd defendant. The first question, that arises for consideration in the appeal is whether, by reason of the fixed deposit being in the joint names of the 1st defendant and Dalavayi Ramaswami payable to either or survivor, the amount should be paid to the 1st defendant alone; and (2) whether the appellant 1st defendant is the legally wedded wife of Dalavayi Ramaswami and is entitled to a share in the fixed deposit amount kept with the State Bank of India, Cuddapah.

(2.) So far as the first question is concerned, there is no doubt that the fixed deposit receipt marked as Exhibit A-l is in the joint names of Mr. Dalavayi Ramaswamy and Mrs. Dalavayi Nagarajamma payable to either Or survivor. A sum of Rs. 4000.00 was borrowed by the parties and the balance that is payable is only Rs. 6092-7-0. The contention of the learned Advocate General on behalf of the appellant is that inasmuch as the sum is payable to either or survivor, the appellant is entitled to the fixed deposit amount on the death of Dalavayi Ramaswami.It was contended that a presumption ot gilt in favour of Dalavayi Nagarajamma should have been raised on the particular facts of the case, The learned Advocate General further argued that even if it is proved that Dalavayi Nagarajamma was not the lawfully wedded wife, it must be held that Dalavayi Ramaswami intended to make a gilt ot the sum of Rs. 10,000.00 in favour of his mistress, the appellant. There is no substance in this contention,

(3.) The identical question came up lor decision before the Privy Council in Guran Ditta v. Ram Ditta, ILR 55 Cal 944 at p. 950; (AIR 1928 PC 172 at p. 173). The deposit that was made in the case was in the joint names of the husband and wife and the condition was that the amount was to be payable to either or the survivor. Lord Far-moor, delivering the judgment of the Privy Council, laid down the law in the following terms; The general principle of equity, applicable both in this country and in India is that in the case of voluntary conveyance of property by a grantor, without any declaration of trust, there is a resulting trust in favour of the grantor, unless it can be proved that an actual gift was intended. An exception has, however, been made in English law, and a gift to a wife is presumed, where money belonging to the husband is deposited at a Bank in the name of a wife, or, where a deposit is made, in the joint names of both husband and wife. This exception has not been admitted in Indian Law under the different conditions which attached to family the, and where the social relationships are of an essentially different character."