Ahmedabad: A dispute over a dying man’s alleged will has left his widow unable to touch the fixed-deposit (FD) savings held jointly with her late husband. The Gujarat high court has issued notices to three banks for refusing to release the funds to a widow after her late husband allegedly willed all his assets to another woman he met during cancer treatment. The widow asserted that the deposits were created from her retirement corpus, giving her clear rights as nominee and joint holder.The HC has now issued notices, seeking explanations from the State Bank of India, Punjab National Bank, and Ahmedabad Mercantile Cooperative Bank for withholding the money from the widow.The petitioner and her husband both worked with the Gujarat Industrial Development Corporation (GIDC). The couple, who had no children, invested their retirement benefits in various fixed deposits. According to the petitioner’s advocate, Zubin Bharda, her husband was diagnosed with cancer and, during treatment, developed a relationship with a woman in the same medical institution. He is said to have executed a will bequeathing all his assets to her.When the petitioner approached the banks to withdraw the FD amounts, all three institutions declined, citing a civil suit filed by the other woman in the Ahmedabad rural court on July 14 claiming entitlement to the deposits under the will. Faced with the refusal, the widow moved the high court.Bharda argued that the other woman “wrongly” staked a claim to the deceased’s assets and the widow’s rightful share without even applying for probate of the will. Questioning the authenticity of the document, he submitted that the funds rightfully belonged to the widow since they were created from her own retirement savings deposited by her husband. He further asserted that in the absence of any restraining order from a competent court, the banks were obligated under Reserve Bank of India (RBI) guidelines to release the funds to the nominee and joint holder.While lawyers for two banks attempted to defend their decision by referring to the pending civil suit, Justice Aniruddha Mayee directed the banks to explain why they did not follow RBI norms. The HC order states: “Issue Notice, returnable on Dec 15, 2025. The learned counsel Mr Rituraj Meena waives service of notice on behalf of the respondent No.1, whereas the learned counsel Mr Mohit Gupta waives service of notice on behalf of the respondent No.2.”
