ORDER

1. The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 12.11.2021 seeking information on the following points:

 My father, Late Shri Man Singh was customer of your bank. He had opened some accounts at your bank. I know SB A/c No. 2075****557 for Rs.3,20,444/- which is standing in the name of Late Shri Man Singh. Being the daughter of Late Shri Man Singh, I have right to know about his accounts and those disposal. Accordingly, you are requested to provide the following information- (i) How many and what types of Accounts with which balance are standing in the name of late Shri Man Singh at your Bank.

(ii) Whether SB A/c No. 2075***567 for Rs. 320444/- at your bank is standing in the name of late Shri Man Singh if yes kindly provide photocopy of ledger copy and A/c opening application form.

2. The CPIO replied vide letter dated 15.12.2021 and the same is reproduced as under:- “In this regard it is informed that only account holders (or their legal heirs in the instance of their demise) are eligible to receive account related details from us. On the instance of demise of the account holder, the legal heirs shall submit the written request along with the Death Certificate, KYC details and sufficient documentary evidence to establish themselves as the legal heir of the deceased to receive the information. As we have the obligation to maintain secrecy of our customer/s account, details exempted from disclosure under Section 8 (1) (e) - (information available to a person in his fiduciary relationship) and 8 (1) (j)- (as the disclosure of such information would cause unwarranted invasion of privacy of the individual and does not involve larger public interest) under the RTI Act, hence no information provided.” 3. Dissatisfied with the response received from the CPIO, the Appellant filed a First Appeal dated 20.01.2022 alleging that the information provided was incomplete, false and misleading. The FAA vide order dated 18.02.2022 upheld the reply given by the CPIO. 4. Aggrieved with the FAA’s order, the Appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal dated 09.05.2022. 5. The appellant remained absent during the hearing despite notice and on behalf of the respondent Ms. Sreeja Rani, Chief Manager, attended the hearing through video conference.

6. The respondent while defending their case inter alia submitted that a response to the RTI application in accordance with the provisions of the RTI Act, 2005, had already been furnished to the appellant vide their letter dated 15.12.2021. She stated that the appellant did not submit any documentary evidence to establish herself as a legal heir of the deceased account holder, hence, the information sought was denied to the appellant under section 8 (1) (e) and (j) of the RTI Act.

7. The Commission after adverting to the facts and circumstances of the case, hearing the respondent and perusal of records, observes that the CPIO has provided an appropriate reply to the RTI Application as per the provisions of the RTI Act vide letter dated 15.12.2021. During the hearing, the respondent submitted that the appellant had not submitted any documentary evidence to establish herself as a legal heir of the deceased account holder, hence, the information sought was denied to the appellant under section 8 (1) (e) and (j) of the RTI Act. Further, in the absence of the appellant to plead her case or contest the CPIO’s submissions, the Commission finds no scope of intervention in the matter. With this observation, the appeal is dismissed. Copy of the decision be provided free of cost to the parties.

Sd/- (Anandi Ramalingam) (आनंदी रामलंगम आनंदी रामलंगम) आनंदी रामलंगम आनंदी रामलंगम Information Commissioner (सूचना सूचना आयु आयु) आयु आयु सूचना सूचना दनांक/Date: 23.02.2024 Authenticated true copy Col S S Chhikara (Retd) कनल एस एस िछकारा (रटायड) Dy. Registrar (उप पंजीयक) 011-26180514 Addresses of the parties:

1. The CPIO Indian Bank, Nodal CPIO,