Survivor in joint bank accounts holds funds as a trustee unless a gift is proven, impacting claims in inheritance disputes.

JUDGMENT

Aggrieved by the order on an interim injunction application, the plaintiff who is the petitioner in the application is in appeal.

2. The suit is one for partition. The subject matter of the interlocutory application are plaint schedule item numbers 8 to 12 which are deposits with defendants 2 to 6 Banks.

3. As per the plaint averments, the plaintiff and the 7th defendant are the sons and the 1st defendant is the daughter of late Shamsudeen. The deposits in question stands in the name of Shamsudeen and the 1st defendant with operational instruction as 'either or survivor'.

4. In the suit the plaintiff filed I.A No.1/2023 to restrain the 1st defendant from withdrawing the Bank deposits and defendants 2 to 6- the Bank from releasing the deposits to the 1st defendant, pending the suit.

5. As per the impugned order the Court has permitted release of one half of the deposit amounts to the 1st defendant on the filing an affidavit, undertaking to redeposit it if ordered under the decree.

6. Dissatisfied with the order the plaintiff- petitioner is in appeal.

7. I have heard the learned counsel on either side.

8. Money deposited by a person in joint names payable to either or survivor, does not on his death constituted a gift to the other person. Unless a gift is proved, the survivor holds the amounts as a trust. The mere fact that the accounts stand in the joint names of the deceased and the 1st defendant by itself does not entitled the 1st defendant to one half of the amounts.[See P.Narayana Menon v. P. Bhageerathi Amma ( 1985 KHC 363 ) and Padmanabhan Bhavani v. Govindan Bhargavi ( 1974 KHC 184)].

9. Title to the money in deposit described in the plaint schedule, is to be decided based on the pleadings and evidence. I do not consider it appropriate to discuss further about it at this stage of the proceedings.

10. It is beyond dispute that the 1st defendant as a legal heir of late Shamsudeen is entitled to 1/5 shares out of the deposits in question. Therefore the 1st defendant cannot be restrained from withdrawing that amount. The rival contentions of the parties with regard to the title over the deposited amounts is to be adjudicated in the suit.

Resultantly, the order impugned is modified permitting defendants 2 to 4 to release 1/5 of the amounts in deposit in the name of late B.A Shamsudeen to the 1st defendant, pending disposal of the suit. The balance amounts in deposit with the Banks shall not be disbursed. Clause 2 to 4 in paragraph 16 of the impugned order will stand modified to the above effect.

The appeal is allowed as above.