L Rama Sudhakar vs Dept Of Posts on 22 March, 2021
In this context, the applicant has cited the Judgment of the Hon'ble
High Court of A.P in T. Prabhakar Rao v Registrar of Cooperative
Societies, 2003 (5) ALD 747 wherein it was held as under:
Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 3 of 3 (0.50 seconds)Kamarajan vs The General Manager on 7 April, 2017
?3. The contention of the learned Counsel for the 1st respondent is
that since the retrial benefits to be received by the 1st respondent are his
pension and gratuity, and since gratuity which is governed by the Payment of
Gratuity Act, 1972 (the Act), is exempt from attachment in view of Section
13 of the Act, and in view of the ratio in T. Prabhakar Rao v. Registrar of
Co-op. Societies , the order under revision needs no interference by this
Court.
Bandi China Ramalinga Reddy @ China ... vs Nalluri Srinivasulu And Anr. on 28 October, 2005
3. The contention of the learned Counsel for the 1st respondent is that since the retrial benefits to be received by the 1st respondent are his pension and gratuity, and since gratuity which is governed by the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 (the Act), is exempt from attachment in view of Section 13 of the Act, and in view of the ratio in T. Prabhakar Rao v. Registrar of Co-op. Societies , the order under revision needs no interference by this Court.
1