Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Gujarat
  4. /
  5. 2012
  6. /
  7. January

Girishchandra vs Ahmedabad

High Court Of Gujarat|29 March, 2012

JUDGMENT / ORDER

When the petition is called-out, Mr. Makwana, learned advocate for the petitioner is not present.
Mr.
Munshaw, learned advocate for the respondent, has submitted that the petitioner had withdrawn certain amount, by way of loan from his Provident Fund Account, though in view of the withdrawal of the amount, the petitioner was not entitled to interest on the amount withdrawn, such interest was credited in his account, which mistake came to the knowledge of the Accounts Department at the time of making payment of retiral dues and therefore, appropriate adjustment was effected while making payment of the amount towards Provident Fund. It is against the said action that the petitioner has preferred present petition.
The respondent has filed affidavit to this effect and the petitioner has filed rejoinder.
Thus, the pleadings are completed.
However, since, learned advocate for the petitioner is not present, S.O. to 2.4.2012.
(K.M.Thaker, J.) kdc Top
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.
Title

Girishchandra vs Ahmedabad

Court

High Court Of Gujarat

JudgmentDate
29 March, 2012