CRP.No.1032 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 15.07.2025 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE P.B. BALAJI C.R.P.No.1032 of 2025 and C.M.P.No.5972 of 2025 Zakira Begum ... Petitioner Vs. 1. Mohammed Imar Sayeed 2. Najmunnissa 3. The Branch Manager, State Bank of India, Bharathi salai Branch, Old No.181, New No.240, Bharathi Salai Royapettah, Chennai – 600 014. ... Respondents PRAYER: Civil Revision Petition filed under Article 227 of Constitution of India, praying to set aside the Fair and Decreetal order, dated 28.01.2025 made in I.A.No.07/2024 in I.A.No.06/2023 in O.S.No.6918/2019 on the file of the V Assistant City Civil Court at Chennai and allow the main C.R.P. For Petitioner : Mr.V.M.Venkataramana For Respondents : Mr.M.Senthil Kumar for R1 & R2 Mr.K.Chandrasekar for R3 ORDER The petitioner / second defendant who is wife and daughter in law of the plaintiffs/respondents 1 and 2, aggrieved by the dismissal of I.A.No.7/2024, has preferred the present Revision Petition. 1/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRP.No.1032 of 2025 2. The second defendant had sought issuance of subpoena to the third respondent bank, the Branch Manager, State Bank of India, Bharathi Salai branch, Old No.240, Royapettah, Chennai 600 014 to appear before the Court and to produce the locker module application cum agreement form and KYC documents pertaining to locker No.177 along with F.D.No.34948590409 and also to give evidence before the Court. 3. At the outset, it is to be noted that the bank though arrayed as the first defendant in the suit, has not chosen to contest the suit and on the contrary, has remained exparte and no written statement has also been filed. This has necessitated the second defendant to take out the application to establish her case that the locker contains only her jewellery. Admittedly the locker has been frozen in the year 2019 and the suit came to be filed after dispute arose between the parties. It is the allegation of the plaintiffs that the bank officials have colluded with the second defendant namely the wife/daughter in law and throwing KYC norms to the winds, permitted the wife to operate the locker on multiple occasions. The further allegation is that the wife has taken way more than 120 Sovereigns of ancestral jewellery. The suit reliefs are directed against not only the second defendant/wife/ daughter in law, but also against the bank. In view of the above, in order to 2/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRP.No.1032 of 2025 adjudicate the issues effectively, it is proper and necessary that the defendants seek to set aside the exparte order passed against the first defendant and also files a written statement. 4. The learned counsel appearing for the bank would state that the bank is willing to file a written statement and contest the suit on merits, if an opportunity is granted. The learned counsel further states that the bank would be in a position to furnish all the documents that are now sought for by the parties, in order to assist the Court in effectively disposing of the suit. 5. In the meantime, considering the fact that there is a rival claim to the contents of the locker, the wife/daughter in law claimed that it is only her jewellery that is available inside and on the contrary, it is the case of the plaintiffs that under the guise of operating the locker, the second defendant/wife/daughter in law has taken away valuable jewellery belonging to the plaintiffs, it would be just and proper to ascertain the actual items that are available inside the locker. 6. In this regard, I am inclined to appoint Mr.Vikramkumar.P, E.No.KAR/2507/2017, Mobile No.9488381195, having office at 160, 3/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRP.No.1032 of 2025 Hussain Plaza, 3rd Floor, Thambu (C) Street, Chennai – 600 001 as an Advocate Commissioner to open the bank locker No.177 along with F.D.No.34948590409 in the State Bank of India, Bharathi Salai branch, Old No.240, Royapettah, Chennai 600 014 in the presence of both the parties or their authorised representatives, including counsel. 7. The Bank shall de-freeze the locker for the purpose of the Commissioner taking an inventory. The scope of the Advocate Commissioner warrant is only to take inventory of the articles available inside the locker. He is permitted to take the assistance of the Jewel appraiser to assist him in the exercise. The Advocate Commissioner is also directed to take photographs of the articles that are placed inside the locker in order to place it as evidence before the trial Court along with inventory. Upon taking the inventory, the contents of the locker shall be placed back inside the locker and the bank is entitled to freeze the same again and await further orders with regard to the operation of the same. The commissioner shall file a report after carrying out inspection within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 8. The petitioner / wife / second defendant shall pay a sum of Rs.15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Thousand only) towards initial remuneration of the Advocate Commissioner. The Advocate Commissioner shall file a 4/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRP.No.1032 of 2025 report before the trial Court as indicated above, and there upon the parties shall work out their respective contentions during trial. 9. Considering that the suit is of the year 2019 and is on advanced part heard stage, the V Assistant City Civil Court, Chennai is directed to dispose of the suit on merits and in accordance with law within a period of three months thereafter. 10. With the above direction, this Civil Revision Petition is disposed of. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed. 15.07.2025 Speaking Order/Non-speaking Order Index : Yes / No Neutral Citation : Yes/No vum To The V Assistant City Civil Court at Chennai P.B. BALAJI,J. vum 5/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRP.No.1032 of 2025 C.R.P.No.1032 of 2025 and C.M.P.No.5972 of 2025 15.07.2025 6/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis