Back
High Court Of Delhi
ANANT GUPTA - Appellant
Versus
PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK - Respondent
Interim Application 7883 of 1996
Decided On : 02/27/1997
HINDU UNDIVIDED FAMILY - SUCCESSION - TRANSFER OF FUNDS - INJUNCTION - COURT HELD THAT THE PLAINTIFF IS NOT ENTITLED TO ANY TEMPORARY INJUNCTION AND THE APPLICATION STANDS ACCORDINGLY DISMISSED.
Fact of the Case:
The plaintiff, a member of a Hindu Undivided Family (HUF), filed a suit seeking an injunction to restrain the defendant bank from transferring an amount of Rs. 19 lacs, which was deposited in the personal account of the deceased Karta of the HUF, to any legal representative or other person. The plaintiff claimed that the amount belonged to the HUF and should be transferred to the HUF account or the Capital Gains Account of the HUF.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the amount in question was deposited in the personal account of the deceased Karta of the HUF and that the succession to the deceased's property would be governed by the provisions of the Hindu Succession Act. The court also noted that the plaintiff had not sought a declaration that the amount belonged to the HUF and that the suit was framed as a suit for injunction and not as a suit for declaration.
Issues: 1. Whether the plaintiff is entitled to an injunction restraining the defendant bank from transferring the amount in question to any legal representative or other person. 2. Whether the amount in question belongs to the HUF or to the deceased Karta of the HUF in his personal capacity.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the plaintiff was not entitled to a temporary injunction because: 1. Granting the injunction would amount to granting the final relief prayed in the suit and would leave nothing to be decided in the suit. 2. Granting the injunction would amount to granting a mandatory injunction at the interlocutory stage, which would be beyond the status quo as on the date of the institution of the suit.
Final Decision: The court dismissed the plaintiff's application for a temporary injunction. However, the court directed that the suit be tried expeditiously and that the matter be placed before the Joint Registrar for admission/denial of documents and before the Court for framing of issues.
( 1 ) THIS order shall dispose of I. A. No. 7883/1996, the application filed by the plaintiff under Order 39, Rules I and 2, CPC, seeking for an injunction directing the defendant No. 1 to deposit the amount of Rs. 19 lacs with interest accrued thereon till date from the account of late Amar Nath Gupta to the HUF Account No. 4381 under the name and style of "amar Nath Gupta and Sons HUF" or the capital Gains Account of the HUF in the defendant No. 1 Bank and also to restrain the defendant No. 1 by way of an ex parte order from transferring the amount of Rs. 19 lacs with interest accured thereon on till date to any legal representative, their servants, heirs and assigns or any other person.
( 2 ) THE plaintiff is stated to be a member of Hindu undivided family known as amar Nath Gupta and Sons HUF . The defendants No. 2,3 and 4 are also stated to be coparceners of the aforesaid Hindu Undivided Family whereas, the defendants Nos. 5,6,7 and 8 are the married sisters of the defendant No. 2. who is stated to be present Karta of the HUF. It is stated that the aforesaid HUF among other properties also owned property bearing No. A-44, Mohan Industrial Area, Mathura Road, New Delhi, in which the then Karta of the HUF Col. Amar Nath Gupta owned undivided share which was purchased out of HUF funds. Late Amar Nath Gupta sold the aforesaid property for an amount of Rs. 75,66,665. 00. Payment for the aforesaid sale was made in two instalments, that is, advance payment amounting Rs. 19 lacs and the balance amount of the sale consideration amounting to Rs. 55,15,332. 00. The cheque amounting to Rs. 19 lacs was deposited in the name of late Amar Nath Gupta and thereafter an FDR for the said amount was also made by late Amar Nath Gupta in his own name. The balance amount of the sale consideration amounting to Rs. 55,15,332. 00 was deposited in the personal account of late Amar Nath Gupta and out of the said amount, an amount of Rs. 50 lacs was transferred to the HUF account existing in the same Bank on 23. 9. 1995. Rs. 4 lacs thereof was invested by Amar Nath Gupta personally and Rs. 19 lacs remained in the FDR as the same had not matured.
( 3 ) IT is stated that the intention of late Amar Nath Gupta, who was the then Karta of the HUF was to invest the said HUF fund in a profitable manner after maturity of the FDR which was scheduled to mature on 21. 11. 1995. Unfortunately, however, Amar Nath Gupta passed away on 11. 11. 1995 before maturity of the aforesaid FDR and in view of his death, the amount received against the said FDR could not be transferred to the account of the HUF like the earlier amount of Rs. 50 lacs which was transferred to the HUF account by Amar Nath Gupta himself from his personal account. Accordingly, the plaintiff approached the defendant No. 1 to transfer said Rs. 19 lacs which got matured against the FDR account on 21. II. 1995 to the HUF account or to the Capital Gains Account, as the same is the property of the HUF.
( 4 ) SINCE the Bank refused to transfer the said Rs. 19 lacs to the HUF account, the present suit has been instituted by the plaintiff seeking for a permanent injunction restraining all the legal representatives, servants, heirs and assigns from dealing with the amount of said Rs. 19 lacs and interest accrued thereon lying in the account of late Amar Nath Gupta in the defendant No. 1 Bank and to pass a mandatory injunction directing the defendant No. 1 Bank not to transfer the said amount from the personal account of late Amar Nath Gupta to any of his legal representatives. In the present suit, the plaintiff also prayed for an ad interim temporary injunction directing the Bank to deposit the said amount of Rs. 19 lacs with interest accrued thereon till date from the account of late Amar Nath Gupta to the HUF account or in the Capital Gains Account as stated hereinabove.
( 5 ) ON service of summons on the defendants, the defendant No. 1 contested the suit by filing a written statement, c
AI
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
