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

2002 Supreme(P&H) 906

V.M.JAIN
Tarlok Chand – Appellant
Versus
State of Punjab – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellant :Mr. Suvir Sehgal, Advocate.
For the Respondent: Mr. Pankaj Bhardwaj, Addl. A.G., Punjab.

JUDGMENT

V.M. Jain, J. - This second appeal from order has been filed by the plaintiff, against the order dated 21.2.2002, passed by the learned Additional District Judge, vide which the application for additional evidence filed by the defendants was allowed, the judgment and decree passed by the learned trial Court were set aside and the trial Court was directed to record the additional evidence of the defendants and also to give opportunity to the plaintiff to produce evidence in rebuttal. The trial Court was further directed to decide the suit afresh after considering the entire evidence on record.

2. The plaintiff had filed a suit for declaration and mandatory injunction, with regard to the amount of provident fund lying in his account. After hearing both sides, the learned trial Court, vide judgment and decree dated 22.4.1999, decreed the suit of the plaintiff and it was held that plaintiff was entitled to the entire amount of provident fund lying in his account and the defendants were directed to release the entire amount of provident fund to the plaintiff. Aggrieved against the said judgment and decree of the trial Court, the defendants filed appeal before the learned Distric









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