SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1963 Supreme(Kar) 39

K.S.HEGDE, T.K.TUKOL
C. S. RATANCHAND – Appellant
Versus
MULTANMULL SESNAMULL – Respondent


( 1 ) THESE two appeals are directed against two Identical orders passed by the District judge, bangalore, on two applications in two different proceedings, one in Execution Case No. 52 of 1952-53 and the ofher In Miscellaneous Case No. 87 of 1952-53 tiled by the Respondent praying that the appellant be directed to refund the amount of Rs. 2,010/- withdrawn by him from the deposit in Court on 7-2-1955, on the ground that the order on the strength of which he had withdrawn the amount had been set aside In appeal. The learned District Judge has granted the petitions and directed the appellant to redeposit the amount within 15 days.

( 2 ) THE facts necessary for the appreciation of the points in dispute are few and undisputed, one ea Read who was an employee in the Kolar Gold fields and was entitled to Rs. 7,588-3-0 towards his Provident Fund Contribution from the Undertaking, was indebted to the appellant ratanchand as also to the Respondent Multanmur. Multanmull had taken a bond from Read On 1-2-952 creating a charge on his Provident Fund for Rs. 1,626-10-9 with interest. He instituted o. S. 114 of 1952-53 in the court of the Munsiff at Kolar for the recovery of the aforesaid amoun





























































Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top