HIRALAL H. MALU LHR OF THE LATE MRS. SHAKUNTALA H. MALU vs. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX PUNE AND ORS

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

Mr. Sancheti, the learned Senior Advocate for the Bank of Maharashtra and Mr. Suresh Kumar, the learned counsel for the Revenue, state that an amount of Rs.70,00,000/- (Rupees Seventy Lakhs) has been deposited in this Court. They state that the price of gold ornaments that had to be returned to the Petitioner would be approximately Rs.59,50,000/- and not LAXMIKANT GOPAL CHANDAN GOPAL CHANDAN Date: 2025.02.14 15:26:32 +0530 Rs.70,00,000/- (Rupees Seventy Lakhs). Therefore, they state that rounded amount of Rs.60,00,000/- (Rupees Sixty Lakhs) would be paid to the Petitioner from out of the deposited amount.

Mr. Sancheti hands in compliance affidavit of Mr. Sanjay Kumar Dash, the Assistant General Manager of the Bank of Maharashtra. This affidavit states that on 12 February 2025 there was a joint verification conducted of the strong room by the officials of Bank of Maharashtra and Income Tax Department. At this joint inspection, it was found that all other articles deposited by the Tax Department in the strong room were safe and tallied. The affidavit also states that the Bank of Maharashtra has been operating the Safe Deposit Vault facility for the last almost 4 decades cine 1966-67 with the Bajirao Road branch and this was the first unfortunate incident that had occurred till date.

The affidavit also states that the officials of the Bank and the Tax Department have had a meeting to discuss the issue at hand and the seriousness of the matter and have concluded that without prejudice to the inter-se rights & liabilities of the Bank and the Tax Department, the Bank shall pay compensation to the Petitioner as may be directed by this Court. Mr. Sancheti submitted that this statement is not clearly reflected in paragraph No.6 but what the affiant meant was that the amount directed by this Court would be paid to the Petitioner without prejudice to the inter-se rights and liabilities between the Bank and the Tax Department.

Now that we are assured that the rest of the items of the Tax Department are found to be safe and tallied in the bank’s strong room/vault and further, this has been the first incident, we do not wish to pursue this matter any further. At the same time, we record that Mr. Sancheti, the learned Senior Advocate for the Bank and Mr. Suresh Kumar, the learned counsel for the Income Tax Department have adopted a most reasonable approach in the matter which requires to be appreciated. They have not only done their best to protect the interest of the parties to whom they represent, but, as officers of this Court, they have also ensured that no injustice is caused to the Petitioner. Accordingly, we record our appreciation for their role in this matter. But for them, we are not too sure, whether their clients, would have adopted or agreed to adopt such a reasonable course in this matter.

Accordingly, from out of the amount of Rs.70,00,000/- deposited in this Court, the Petitioner is granted liberty to withdraw an amount of Rs.60,00,000/-. The Petitioner should provide the bank details to the Registry and the Registry should as early as possible and in any event, within a maximum of a week from Petitioner’s applying the bank details transfer this amount into the Petitioner’s bank account.

The Petitioner can receive this amount without prejudice to his rights to pursue ordinary remedies, should the Petitioner still have any grievances.

The Registry to return balance amount of Rs.10,00,000/- to the Bank of Maharashtra since, to overcome administrative difficulties, it is the bank which deposited the entire amount of Rs.70,00,000/- though, our direction was that this amount should be split up equally between the Tax Department and the Bank.

The Petition is disposed of in the above terms without any costs order. Still, now that the CBDT and the CMD of the Bank have taken cognizance of this incident, we sincerely expect that they take such cognizance to its logical conclusion so that such incident do not recur and citizens are not forced to run from pillar to post or approach the Courts of law for even securing their just entitlements.

All concerned to act upon the authenticated copy of this order. (Jitendra Jain, J) (M.S. Sonak, J)