[52 DLR (HCD) (2000) 36] [Arab Bangladesh Bank Ltd. vs. Ziauddin and others. ]

Suit Title: Arab Bangladesh Bank Ltd. vs. Ziauddin and others. [52 DLR (HCD) (2000) 36]

Type: Appeal from Original order No. 221 of 1995 with cross objection No. 2 of 1997.

Judges: Mahmudul Amin Choudhury & Md. Abdul Aziz.

Date of Judgment: December 7, 1998

Under Section: 103 of the Banking companies Act, 1991

Choice for the payment of deposited money: (1) Where an individual has, or several persons have jointly deposited money with a banking company in his or in their name, that individual depositor may separately or, as the case may be, the group of depositors may jointly, in the way prescribed, choose a person to which, in the case of the death of the individual depositor or of all of the joint depositors, the deposited money shall be given:
Provided that the said individual depositor or the said group of depositors may at any time cancel their choice and choose, in the way prescribed, another person.

(2) The person chosen under sub-section (1) being a minor, the individual depositor or the joint depositors may, in the prescribed way, direct that shall, in the case of the death of the individual depositors or of the joint depositors, receive the money during the period of minority of the chosen person.

(3) Notwithstanding anything contained in any Act for the time being in force or in any will or any kind of document regarding the allotment of properties, the person chosen under sub-section (1) or directed under sub-section (2) shall, after the death of the individual depositor or as the case may be, of all of the joint depositors, attain all the rights the individual depositor or the joint depositors had on that deposit, and every other person shall be deprived of those rights.

 (4) Where a banking company has made payments in accordance with this section, all its obligations in respect of the deposit concerned shall be deemed fulfilled:
Provided that no right or claim that any person may have or make against the person to whom the deposited money has been paid under this section shall be prejudicial to the provision of this subsection.

Short description of the suit: The short fact leading to this appeal is that, the plaintiffs who are respondents here instituted the afore said suit praying for a declaration that they are entitled to 3/4 th amount of money now being kept with the appellant- bank in FDR showing in the name of defendant No. 1 and her late husband Nur uddin Ahmed and they are also entitled to 3/4 th of amounting to Tk. 5, 00, 000, 00. The fact lading to this appeal is that, late Nur uddin Ahmed with his own money made a fixed deposit with the appellant bank with a stipulation that he or his wife defendant No. 1 would operate the account holders the survivor shall operate the same. The plaintiff’s further case is that after the death of said Nur Uddin Ahmed these plaintiffs became co-sharers in the properties left be hind by him and they as co-sharers inherited the properties left behind by late Nur Uddin Ahamed. After filing of the suit the plaintiffs filed an application under 39, rule 1 read with section 151 of the code of civil procedure and prayed for restraining the appellant bank from making any payment to defendant No. 1 from the account maintained with them by late Nur Uddin Ahmed and his wife defendant No. 1. Before the trial court defendant No. 1 entered appearance and contested the application for injunction and her case is is that the money was deposited in the joint account with a clear instructions that any one or survivor may operate the account and after the death of Nur Uddin Ahmed she is now legally entitled to the money and to operate the account. The learned subordinate Judge on hearing both the sides by the impugned order dated 8.7.95 restrained the bank as well as respondent No. 5 as afore said.

Principle of the suit: - When a joint account is opened and there is specific direction that any of the joint account-holders or survivors may operate the account then the bank is bound to follow it in case of death of one of the account – holders.

-------------