Bank statement of appellant’s mother-in-law sought to establish in the court that her mother-in-law did not have the resources to construct the house & that it was built by her late husband - CIC: information exempt u/s 8(1)(j); seek through court
This matter pertains to an RTI application dated 31.5.2013 filed by the Appellant, seeking statement of the bank account of her motherinlaw. The CPIO responded on 4.7.2013 and denied the information under Section 8 (1) (d) & (j) of the RTI Act on the ground that it pertained to the account of a third party. Not satisfied with the reply of the CPIO, the Appellant filed an appeal to the First Appellate Authority on 27.7.2013. In his order dated 23.8.2013, the FAA upheld the CPIO’s reply. The Appellant filed second appeal dated 19.9.2013 to the CIC, which was received by the Commission on 25.9.2013.
2. We heard the submissions of the Appellant and the Respondents. The Appellant submitted that her husband had constructed a house from his income. He died in an accident in November 2012. She alleged that her motherinlaw wishes to bequeath the house to a lady living in the neighbourhood and the Appellant has filed a court case to prevent her from doing so. The Appellant further submitted that she needs the bank statement of her motherinlaw to establish in the court that her motherinlaw did not have the resources to construct the house and that it was built from the resources of her late husband. In response to our query, the Appellant confirmed that the court case filed by her is pending in the court of Additional District Judge, Ajmer. The Appellant also confirmed that her name does not figure in any capacity in the account of her motherinlaw.
3. The Respondents reiterated the reply already given by them to the Appellant.
4. We have considered the records and the submissions made before us by both the parties. We note that the information sought by the Appellant pertains to the account of a third party and is exempt from disclosure under Section 8 (1) (j) of the RTI Act. We further note that the Appellant has not established any larger public interest warranting its disclosure to her. She needs it in connection with a court case filed by her and is at liberty to seek such information, as she requires to establish her case, through the concerned court. We are not in a position to give any relief to her under the RTI Act.
5. In view of the foregoing, we see no ground to interfere with the decision of the Respondents to deny information in this case.
6. With the above observations, the appeal is disposed of.
7. Copies of this order be given free of cost to the parties.
Citation: Ms. Sruchi Gupta v. Union Bank of India in File No. CIC/VS/A/2013/001748/SH