LexaceLexace Ask the AI ›
βš–οΈ Ask the AI about your situation:πŸš— Car AccidentπŸ’Ό Work / Job🏠 Housing / EvictionπŸ‘ͺ Family / DivorceπŸ“‹ Contract DisputeπŸ’° Money Owed

RAM CHANDER TALWAR & ANR. versus DEVENDER KUMAR TALWAR & ORS.

Citation: [2010] 11 S.C.R. 897 · Decided: 06-10-2010 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: AFTAB ALAM, RAJENDRA MAL LODHA · Disposal: Dismissed

Cited by 2 judgment(s) · see the full citation network in Lexace

Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case

Judgment (excerpt)

[2010] 11 S.C.R. 897 
RAM CHANDER TALWAR & ANR. 
v. 
DEVENDER KUMAR TALWAR & ORS. 
(Civil Appeal No. 1684 of 2004) 
OCTOBER 06, 2010 
[AFTAB ALAM AND R.M. LODHA, JJ.] 
BANKING REGULATION ACT, 1949: 
A 
B 
s.45ZA(2) - Nominee's right in relation to the deposit 
made by deceased - Held: All the monies receivable by the C 
nominee by virtue of s.45 ZA(2) would form part of the estate 
of the deceased depositor and devolve according to the rule 
of succession to which the depositor may be governed -
Section 45 ZA(2) merely puts the nominee in the shoes of 
the depositor after his death and clothes him with the exclusive D 
right to receive the money lying in the account - It gives him 
all the rights of the depositor so far as the depositor's account 
is concerned - But it by no stretch of imagination makes the 
nominee the owner of the money lying in the account -
Banking Regulation Act is in no way concerned with the E 
question of succession - The High Court has rightly rejected 
the appellant's claim -
The provision uls. 6(1) of the 
Government Saving Certificate Act, 1959 is materially and 
substantially the same as the provision of s.45ZA(2) of the 
Banking Regulation Act -
Government Saving Certificate F 
Act, 1959 - s.6(1) - Succession...., Banks/Banking. 
V.N. Khanchandani & Anr. v. V.L. Khanchandani & Anr., 
(2000) 2 Suppl. SCR 415, relied on. 
Case Law Reference: 
(2000) 2 Suppl. SCR 415 
relied on 
para 5 
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal No. 
1684 of 2006. 
897 
G 
H 
898 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[2010] 11 S.C.R. 
A 
From the Judgment & Order dated 20.9.2004 of the High 
B 
Court of Delhi at New Delhi in FAO No. 201 of 2004. 
Swetank Shantanu, Satyajit Patra, Karan Chawla (for Ajay 
Kumar Talesara) for the Appellants. 
Sanjay Goswami, H.K. Balajee, A.S. Bhasme, Arvind 
Kumar Gupta for the Respondents. 
The following Order of the Court was delivered 
ORDER 
C 
Heard counsel appearing for the appellants. 
Appellant no.1, who was the nominee in the bank account 
held by his deceased mother claims full rights over the money 
lying in the account, to the exclusion oHhe respondent who. is 
none else than his full brother. The claim is based on section 
D 
45 ZA of the Banking Regulation Act, which according to him, 
makes the nominee of the depositor the sole beneficiary, 
vested with all the rights of sole depositor. 
E 
F 
G 
H 
Mr. Swetank Shantanu, counsel appearing for the 
appellants, strenuously argued that by virtue of sub-section 2 
of section 45 ZA, the nominee of the depositor, after the death 
of the depositor acquires all his/her rights to the express 
exclusion of all other persons and, therefore, the respondent 
can not lay any claim to the money in the account or in regard 
to the articles that might be lying in the bank locker held by their 
deceased mother. 
The submission is quite fallacious and is based on a 
complete misconception of the provision of the Act. Sub-
section 2 of the 45ZA, reads as follows:-
45ZAxxx 
xxx 
xxx xxx 
(2) Notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for 
the time being in force or in any disposition, whether 
testamentary or otherwise, in respect of such deposit, 
where a nomination made in the prescribed manner 
RAM CHANDER TALWAR & ANR. v. DEVENDER 
899 
KUMAR TALWAR & ORS. 
purports to confer on any person the right to receive the 
A 
amount to deposit from the banking company, the nominee 
shall, on the death of the sole depositor or, as the case 
may be, on the death of all the depositors, become entitled 
to all the rights of the sole depositor or, as the case may 
be, of the depositors, in relation to such deposit to the 
B 
exclusion of all other persons, unlessΒ· the nomination is 
varied or cancelled in the prescribed manner. 
xxx 
xxx xxx 
xx 
(emphasis added) C 
Section 45ZA(2) merely puts the nominee in the shoes of 
the depositor after his death and clothes him with the exclusive 
right to receive the money lying in the account. It gives him all 
the rights of the depositor so far as the depositor's account is 
concerned. But it by no stretch of imagination makes the o 
nominee the owner of the money lying in the account. It needs 
to be remembered that the Banking Regulation Act is enacted 
to consolidate and amend the law relating to banking. It is in 
no way concerned with the question of succession. All the 
monies receivable by the nominee by virtue of section 45 ZA(2) 
E 
would, therefore, form part of the estate of the deceased 
d

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.