Smt Anita vs Uco Bank
2014 Latest Caselaw 682 Del

$~22
*    IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

%                            Judgment delivered on: 4th February, 2014


+                              CM(M) 129/2014


      SMT ANITA                                           ..... Petitioner
                         Represented by:    Mr.Lokesh Kumar Mishra,
                                            Advocate with Petitioner in
                                            person.

                         Versus

      UCO BANK                                           ..... Respondent
                         Represented by:    Mr.Sarfaraz Khan, Advocate.

CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KAIT

SURESH KAIT, J. (Oral)

CM No. 2245/2014 (for exemption)

Exemptions allowed, subject to all just exceptions. The application stands disposed of.

CM(M) 129/2014

1. Notice issued.

2. Mr.Sarfaraz Khan, learned counsel accepts notice on behalf of the respondent.

3. Vide the instant petition, the petitioner is seeking directions against the respondent to release the amount lying deposited in FDR bearing No.397262 dated 11.01.2012 in A/c No.18580310077849 in her favour.

4. Brief facts of the case are that the husband of the petitioner, namely, Shri Shambhu had died in the accident occurred on 21.06.2009 leaving behind the petitioner widow, two minor children and the parents.

5. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that the petitioner intended to purchase a piece of land for constructing a house as she has no place to live in. Accordingly, she had entered into an agreement for purchasing a land measuring 300 square yards for a sum of Rs.15,00,000/- out of which a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- has been paid by the petitioner to the seller as an advance money.

6. Learned counsel further submits that the petitioner needs money for the aforesaid purpose as she has no other source of income.

7. For the same purpose, an application was moved by the petitioner before the learned Tribunal, however, the same was dismissed vide order dated 09.01.2014.

8. Hence, this petition.

9. The petitioner is present in Court with her parents-in-law. This Court interacted with her.

10. Therefore, keeping in view the averments made in the instant petition and the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner, the Branch Manager of UCO Bank, Patiala House Courts, New Delhi is directed to release the amount lying deposited in the FDR noted above with interest accrued thereon in favour of the petitioner on taking necessary steps by her.

11. In view of the above, this petition is allowed.

12. A copy of this order be given dasti to the learned counsel for the parties under the signature of the Court Master.

13. The Registry of this Court is directed to send a copy of this order to the Branch Manager of the aforementioned Bank for compliance.

SURESH KAIT, J.

FEBRUARY 04, 2014 sb