A savings bank was opened jointly in the name of Mr Kailash - then a minor aged 16 years - and his paternal uncle Mr. Rakesh in the Damri Galli branch of Chinar Bank for deposit of compensation funds amounting to Rs. 10 lacs received from the government following the murder of his father while on duty as a security guard with a government organisation. His mother had passed away a few years earlier, and Mr Kailash was the sole survivor in his family.

A couple of years later, on attaining adulthood, i.e. majority status, a complaint was filed by Mr. Kailash stating that most of the funds had been withdrawn by Mr. Rakesh in connivance with a particular staff member of the bank and that he, Kailash, as the ultimate beneficiary of his fathers estate had been denied the use and the comfort of the funds given in compensation for his fathers blood being unjustly shed while on duty. He alleged that the bank had been negligent in handling the matter and allowed the withdrawals to be permitted without keeping him apprised of the purpose and intention. He demanded that the bank should compensate him for the loss and that separately Mr. Rakesh and the banks staff member be proceeded against under the law for criminal conspiracy.

The bank, in its response, stated that the bank account had been opened as per the instructions given to it. They further submitted that while the complainant was not very educated, he could read and write and was also old enough to operate the account. Proof of his age and literacy were submitted in evidence. The bank maintained that they are not liable to compensate the complainant for any alleged loss.

Task: What is your assessment of this case? Examine the situation in the light of rights, responsibilities, fiduciary trust, malfeasance and ultimately justice?

(You can take 3 days to answer this question but, please make sure to do it properly. It will mean a lot and help).

(This is all the information that I have and as mentioned in the question, please answer accordingly).