- (1.) C.M. No. 10295-CII of 2011 Application is allowed subject to all just exceptions. Civil Revision No.2565 of 2011 The present revision petition has been filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India for setting aside order dated 23.3.2011, Annexure P4, vide which learned Additional Civil Judge, Senior Division, Panipat, allowed application of respondent No.1 with a further prayer to dismiss application of respondent No.1
(2.) I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and have gone through the whole record carefully including the impugned order passed by learned trial Court.
(3.) Facts relevant for the decision of present revision petition are that a civil suit was filed by petitioner-plaintiff against respondents defendants for declaration to the effect that investment of Rs.1,00,00,000/- (Rupees One crore) made with respondent-defendant No.2 vide Folio No.4848998/96 dated 10.3.2008 was, in fact, made by plaintiff, though in the name of his son, i.e., respondent-defendant No.1 and that he is only entitled to receive the maturity value of the said investment with a consequential relief of mandatory injunction directing respondent-defendant No.1 to surrender whole of such maturity value in respect of the said investment, inclusive of all accrued benefits in favour of the plaintiff and also seeking mandatory injunction directing respondent-defendant No.2 to pay whole of such maturity value, inclusive of all accrued benefits, directly and exclusively to the plaintiff in his saving account maintained by him with consequential relief of permanent injunction restraining defendant No.1 for ever from claiming anything out of the said investment or its maturity value and also restraining defendant No.2 from paying anything out of the said investment amount to anybody else except the plaintiff.;