• Bank’s payment ≠ ownership. “Either-or-survivor” is only a mandate to the bank. After A’s death, the bank may pay B, but B holds A’s share in trust for A’s legal heirs. Reserve Bank of India

• What amount belongs to A’s heirs? A’s beneficial share as on the date of A’s death (usually 50% if contributions/shares aren’t proved otherwise) plus proportionate interest earned on that share until actual payout. The survivor (B) must account to the heirs for that amount. Mondaq

• Shares before & after death:

  • Before death: As per agreed/actual contribution; if not provable, courts often treat it as equal shares for accounting between A & B.

  • After A’s death: Bank can release to B, but B must pass A’s share to A’s legal heirs (B’s own legal-heir share comes within that succession split). Mondaq+1

• Supporting principles / case guidance:

  • RBI: Survivor/nominee receives as trustee of legal heirs—payment doesn’t defeat heirs’ rights. Reserve Bank of India

  • SC principle on nomination (analogous): Nominee/survivor is not owner; heirs’ succession rights prevail (e.g., Sarbati Devi v. Usha Devi, SC). White & Brief+1

Practical tip: If heirs dispute shares, evidence of who contributed governs; absent proof, settle on 50:50 base, add accrued interest on A’s half till payment, and distribute among A’s heirs per the relevant succession law (or Will).

Legal heirs can claim share in Balance funds lying in bank account on date of death of A 

After death of A both legal heirs will have equal share in money lying in bank account t 

The ownership of the funds depends on the source of the deposits

if the funds originated from the deceased person. Legal heirs can challenge the survivor's claim to the entire balance.

I’d only an and b are legal heir B will be 100 percent share holder after death of B. If A has children or wife they will have share in it and B will not be 100 percent shareholder 

Upon the death of one of the joint account holders, the survivor can withdraw and close the joint account, but the legal heirs of deceased account holder are entitled for a share out of A's share in the account as on the date of death of the deceased account holder.

If B is also one of the legal heirs of the deceased account holder then besides his own share he is entitled to a share out of deceased account holder's share along with other legal heirs as on the date of death of A.

B has to pay the other legal heirs out of A's share in the account in which he can settle the balance amount after taking his share as one of the legal heirs along with his own half share out of the joint account.

- As per law, after the demise of A , his property and assets would be devolved upon his legal heirs equally. 

- Further, even if B is a nominee in the said bank account , then also B has legal right to claim equal share in the fund. 

If A and B are joint holders, and A dies — B (as survivor) can withdraw money, but only holds A’s share in trust for A’s legal heirs.

Heirs can claim A’s share as on date of death, not the later closing balance, unless B added money later.

B must pay other heirs their portion from A’s share as per succession law (e.g., if A has 2 heirs including B, each gets 50% of A’s share).

Banks pay the survivor for convenience, but heirs can file a civil suit for recovery of A’s share.

Dear Client, In an “either or survivor” savings account held jointly by A and B, after A’s death, the survivor (B) becomes entitled to operate and withdraw the account funds as per the bank’s contract. However, the survivor holds the deceased’s share in a fiduciary capacity for the legal heirs, not as exclusive owner. Therefore, the legal heirs of A can claim their share from B, but only to the extent of the balance standing in the account on the date of A’s death, not any subsequent deposits, interest, or withdrawals made later by B. This position has been upheld by the Supreme Court in Smt. Sarbati Devi v. Smt. Usha Devi, (1984) 1 SCC 424, and various High Court judgments, which clarify that nomination or survivor rights do not override succession rights. Hence, B must account for and pay the heirs of A the share corresponding to A’s portion in the balance as on the date of death.
I hope this answer helps. For any more queries, do not hesitate to contact us.

B must pay legal heirs of A the amount standing to A’s credit as on the date of death, along with proportionate interest accrued thereafter.

Final closing balance is relevant only if no new transactions occurred after A’s death.

If B withdrew or added funds later, only A’s portion at death + interest is to be shared.

Key Judgments:

1. Sarbati Devi v. Usha Devi, (1984) 1 SCC 424 - Nominee or survivor does not become owner; legal heirs inherit as per law.

2. Shakti Yezdani & Anr. v. Jayanand Jayant Salgaonkar & Ors., (2017) 7 SCC 192 - Survivorship clause gives possession, not ownership. Legal heirs’ rights remain intact.

3. Ram Chander Talwar v. Devender Kumar Talwar, (2010) 10 SCC 671 - Legal heirs can claim their share from the survivor.

Before death: A and B each own 50% of the joint account.

After death of A:

The “survivor” clause gives B possession of the entire amount, but ownership of A’s 50% passes to A’s legal heirs.

If B is also a legal heir, B will receive:
B’s own 50% share + B’s proportionate share from A’s 50% (as per succession law).

B must therefore pay other legal heirs their share out of A’s 50%.
The amount payable is calculated based on the balance as on the date of A’s death, not the closing balance.

When a joint account is opened in the names of two or more persons, the general rule of law is that the money in the account belongs to the persons who have contributed it, unless there is clear evidence of an intention to make a gift or advancement to the other joint holder. The survivor’s right to operate the account after the death of one of the account holders is a contractual facility given by the bank to enable smooth operation of the account, and not by itself conclusive of ownership of the funds. Therefore, the surviving account holder may withdraw or receive the balance from the bank, but he or she does so in a fiduciary capacity and remains accountable to the legal heirs of the deceased for the share belonging to the deceased, unless the intention of absolute gift in favour of the survivor is established.

The correct and accepted measure for determining the entitlement of the deceased’s heirs is the balance in the account as it stood on the date of the deceased’s death. The heirs of A are entitled to claim A’s share in that balance together with any interest or accretions attributable to A’s portion until the date of settlement. The survivor B cannot claim that the heirs are entitled only to the closing balance at the time of eventual withdrawal or closure of the account. Any subsequent additions or withdrawals made by B after A’s death must be accounted for, and B bears the burden of showing that such withdrawals were for legitimate or personal use and not out of the deceased’s funds.

The law on this point has been clarified by several judicial pronouncements. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in Ram Chander Talwar v. Devender Kumar Talwar (2010) 10 SCC 671 held that the nominee or survivor in a bank account does not automatically become the owner of the funds; the money forms part of the deceased’s estate and devolves upon the legal heirs according to succession. Similarly, in Prabha Bennett v. Rohit Sharma (Delhi High Court, decided 5 September 2022), it was reiterated that the surviving joint holder, though authorised to withdraw, is accountable to the heirs of the deceased joint holder unless there is proof of a gift or express intention to vest ownership in the survivor. These principles reflect the settled position that survivorship in a joint account does not extinguish the rights of the legal heirs of the deceased.

In the absence of evidence of a contrary intention, the normal inference is that the amount in the joint account represented the contribution of A and therefore forms part of A’s estate on his death. The heirs of A are entitled to an equal share in A’s portion of the balance as per the personal law of succession applicable. If B is also one of the legal heirs, then B’s liability to pay other heirs shall be limited to the remaining portion of A’s share after deducting B’s own lawful share as heir. For example, if A’s share in the account at the time of death was ₹10,00,000 and there are four heirs including B, each heir’s entitlement is ₹2,50,000. Since B already holds the entire amount, B will retain his own share of ₹2,50,000 and must pay the balance ₹7,50,000 to the other three heirs, together with any proportionate interest that may have accrued on that sum.

In the event B closes the account or withdraws the entire balance, the other legal heirs are entitled to demand a full accounting from B and to seek payment of their respective shares by serving a written notice. If B fails to account or refuses payment, the other heirs may institute a civil suit for rendition of accounts and recovery of their share, supported by the bank statements showing the balance on the date of death and the subsequent withdrawals. Conversely, if B claims that the deceased intended to gift the amount absolutely to him, such intention must be proved by clear documentary or contemporaneous evidence, failing which the presumption remains that the money belonged to the deceased and devolves by succession.

It may be noted that the survivor’s right against the bank is a matter of contract between the account holders and the bank, whereas the right of succession among legal heirs is governed by substantive law. The bank, having paid the balance to the survivor, is discharged of its liability, but the heirs retain the right to recover their share from the survivor by appropriate proceedings.

In conclusion, the heirs of the deceased account holder are entitled to the deceased’s share in the account as on the date of death, together with the interest or accretions derived from that share. The surviving account holder, even if authorised to operate or close the account, holds the amount corresponding to the deceased’s share in trust for all the legal heirs. Where the survivor is also one of the heirs, the survivor shall be entitled to retain his or her own hereditary share and shall pay to the remaining heirs their respective shares out of the deceased’s portion. The legal basis of these principles is reflected in the judgments of the Supreme Court in Ram Chander Talwar v. Devender Kumar Talwar (2010) 10 SCC 671 and of the Delhi High Court in Prabha Bennett v. Rohit Sharma (2022).