JUDGMENT

Yashwant Varma, J. - The petitioner is a Trust duly registered and incorporated in accordance with the laws of Canada. It is engaged in the business of acting as a fiduciary, agent, executor or trustee on behalf of its clients. It's functioning as per the petitioner is regulated by the Trust and Loan Companies act, S.C. 1991, c.45.

2. It is stated to have been appointed as the executor and trustee of the last will and testament of the Late Mrs. Fleurette Mehta [Testator] dated 01 august 2017. The aforesaid will has been duly probated by the Superior Court of Justice at Ottawa [Superior Court] vide its order dated 05 July 2019. a copy of the certified and apostilled Will and Testament along with the order of the Superior Court of Justice has been placed on the record as annexure P-2.

3. It has petitioned this Court seeking the following reliefs: -

'(a) Issue an appropriate writ in the nature of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction directing Respondent No. 1 to accept the documents submitted by the Petitioner as being in conformity with the requirements of the law and thereby allow access to the Saving Bank account No.10415459936 and permit the Petitioner to close the said Bank account and realise the amount contained therein by remitting the same to its bank account as mentioned in Para 9(xxi) hereinabove;

(b) Issue an appropriate writ in the nature of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction directing the Respondent No. 1 to rectify its record and its TDS returns to reflect the correct entities, i.e., for the period from 06 December 2017 to 27 January 2019 - TDS returns of the Bank to be revised reflecting PaN of late Mrs. Fleurette Mehta [FaXPM2631D], and from 28 January 2019 onwards - TDS returns of the Bank to be revised reflecting PaN of 'the Estate of late Mrs Fleurette Mehta' [aaBaE6694a].

(c) Issue an appropriate writ in the nature of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction directing Respondent No. 2 to grant necessary and required approvals as the case may be, for enabling the Petitioner to remit the amount in the Bank account of the Petitioner as mentioned in Para 9(xxi);'

4. It appears that the testator held a Savings Bank account with the respondent State Bank of India [SBI] at its branch at C-19, Vasant Vihar, New Delhi. Before this Court it was not disputed that the sums standing to the credit of that account stands duly covered under the order of probate as made by the Superior Court. When the writ petition was initially entertained, notice came to be issued to the respondents pursuant to which a counter affidavit has been filed by SBI. On 04 august 2021, the Court took note of the submission addressed that the views of the Reserve Bank of India [RBI] may also be obtained since the petitioner is an overseas entity and seeks to access the account of the testator and repatriation of moneys presently held in credit. Pursuant to the aforesaid order, RBI was granted time to file an affidavit explaining the statutory regimen which would govern as also its stand with respect to the prayers as made in the writ petition.

5. SBI in terms of its affidavit which has been filed in these proceedings essentially rests its objections on a Circular of 30 September 2019. according to Mr. Gupta, learned counsel representing SBI, the Circular clearly mandates a Letters of administration being obtained from a court in India notwithstanding probate having been granted by a foreign court of competent jurisdiction. according to Mr. Gupta, notwithstanding the will having been duly probated by the Superior Court, the aforesaid circular clearly binds the respondent Bank and consequently the petitioner must be held to be obliged to obtain a Letters of administration in respect of the last will and testament of the testator.

6. The RBI has in its short affidavit filed in these proceedings essentially submitted that since the prayers as made would necessarily entail the remittance