SHARDA CHOPRA Vs. STATE BANK OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The players to the game are bound by the Rules of the game. This is more so in the case of a referee, who is instrumental in laying down the Rules. State Bank of India is in the position of a referee. It has laid down certain norms, which deal with the method and manner in which the articles kept in the bank's safe deposit locker are to be dealt with. The instructions on the point have been made available by Shri A.M. Naik, Advocate appearing for the State Bank of India. Before noticing the facts and legal position, it would be apt to notice these instructions.

(2.) One Shri S.L. Chopra was having a locker with the State Bank of India. He has since died. Regarding his assets the present petitioners who claim to be his heirs had approached the 5th Additional District Judge Gwalior for a succession certificate. This has been duly granted. This deals with various other items, including fixed deposit accounts with various banks. State Bank of India is also one such banks. Armed with the succession certificate, they requested the State Bank of India to permit the present petitioners to have access to the bank's locker. This has been declined. The Court below has declined to issue succession certificate regarding the articles put in the locker. This is how the present revision has been filed.

(3.) The question which arises for determination is whether a succession certficate has necessarily to be obtained for having access to valuable lying in the Bank's locker. This aspect is again subject-matter of instructions issued by the Bank. This may also be noticed:-