STATE BANK OF INDIA Vs. NEELAM SHARMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Smt. Sudesh Kumari had Savings Bank Account No. 5602 with the State Bank of India, Ghaziabad Branch, where she had a locker also. She died on 28th of May, 1977, leaving behind Neelam and Indu, two minor daughters and Sat Dev Sharma, husband. On the 14th of Oct., 1977, the two minor daughters filed a suit at Amritsar, through their maternal grandfather, against the (i) State Bank of India, Ghaziabad, (ii) State Bank of India having its Head Office at New Delhi, and (iii) Sat Dev Sharma, their father, for a mandatory injunction directing the State Bank to allow the plaintiffs or their agent to open and operate Locker No. 101 and Savings Bank Account No. 5602, standing in the name of their mother Smt, Sudesh Kumari, by providing keys of the locker and all kinds of facilities etc. It was also alleged that their father is giving out that their mother had executed a will in his favour with regard to the said locker, which is a false and frivolous document.

(2.) The State Bank opposed the suit and raised a preliminary objection that the Civil Court at Amritsar had no jurisdiction to try the suit on which following issue No. 5 was framed:- 5. Whether this Court has jurisdiction to try the suit ? This issue was tried as a preliminary issue and the trial Court, by order dated 7th of Dec. 1978, held that the Court at Amritsar has jurisdiction to try the suit, Against the aforesaid order, the State Bank has come to this Court in revision.

(3.) Shri R. K. Chhibbar, appearing for the State Bank of India has urged that the Court below was in error in passing the Impugned order inasmuch as the explanation to S. 20 of Civil P. C. (hereinafter referred to as the Code), was not kept in view by it. In order to appreciate the argument, it will be useful to reproduce S, 20 of the Code-