Case Details

Citation(s)
1958 SLG 145 1958 SLD 145 1958 PLD 82
Lahore High Court
Civil Revision Case No. 271 of 1956, decided on 23rd October 1957, from the order of Muhammad Sadiq Ahmad Khan, Civil Judge II Class, Multan, dated the 5th May 1956
B. Z. KAIKAUS, J
Muhammad Amin Khan for Petitioner. M. Iqbal Hussain for
Respondents No. 1 and 3

UMER HAYAT

VS

Mst. HAYAT BIBI and others

Law:

Section:

(a) Provident Funds Act (XIX of 1925),Ss, 3 (2), 4 & 5 -Question as to who is entitled to amount of Provident Fund should be decided according to Act and Rules reads thereunder--Amount of Provident Fund is to be paid to nominee or dependant according to Rules--Nominee or dependant get: absolute title to amount payable-In absence of nominee or dependant amount of Provident Fund will go to heirs of subscriber according to law applicable to deceased subscriber': estate. The question as to who is entitled to a provident fund is to be decided in accordance with the provisions of the Provident Funds Act (XIX of 1925) and the rules framed by the Government. In case there is a nomination by the subscriber of some person in accordance with the rules or the rules provide for payment of the provident fund to some dependant, the fund is to be paid to such nominee or such dependant. The authority which maintains a fund has power to make prevision in the rules for a nomination or for the distribution of the fund among the dependants. So far as the nominee or the dependants are concerned, they get an absolute title to the amount payable to them. If there be no nominee, nor a dependant who is entitled to the sum in accordance with the rules, then the provident fund has to go to the heir of the subscriber in accordance with law applicable to hi: estate. The Provident Funds Act, in so far as it entitles the nominee or the dependant to receive the Provident Fund overrides the personal law and creates rights of ownership ill the dependant or the nominee. The intention of the Provident Funds Act and the rules appears to confer some real benefit on the dependants. The words "entitled to receive" are used in the Act to denote the person who owns. If in spite of the strong words used in section 5, the intention was only to make the recovered of the money a trustee, the matter should have been made clear. Hayatuddin v. Mst. Rahiman A I R 1935 Sind 73 rel (b) Provident Funds Act (XIX of 1925), S. 3 (2)­Amount of Provident Fund vesting in dependant is free from all liabilities. According to section 3 (2), the fund which vests in a dependant is free not only from any liability…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register

Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492