Nazar v. a.Thomas
Case brief
What is this about?
Appeal against dismissal of applications to lift property attachment. High Court held attachment unnecessary in recovery suit due to agreement sale and improper in cheque dishonour suit as sale preceded attachment. Appeals allowed with security requirement for one suit.
What did the court decide?
Attachment lifted in F.A.O.No.37/2008 subject to security; attachment lifted in F.A.O.No.36/2008. Impugned orders set aside.
What the court decided
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT :
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMAN &
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.BHAVADASAN
MONDAY, THE 27TH JULY 2009 / 5TH SRAVANA 1931
FAO.No. 36 of 2008()
-------------------AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 16/11/2007 IN IA.1649/07 IN OS.170/2007 of PRINCIPAL SUB COURT,ATTINGAL
APPELLANT/PETITIONER:
NAZAR, AGED 34 YEARS, S/O.JALAL, KAREEMA MANZIL, VETTOOR DESOM, VETTOOR VILLAGE, CHIRAYINKEEZHU TALUK.
BY ADV. SRI.J.JAYAKUMAR
RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENTS:
Issues for consideration
3 issues framed by the court
Whether attachment of property in a sale agreement recovery suit is necessary when attachment makes it impossible to take delivery by the buyer.
Whether attachment of property already sold before attachment can be justified in a cheque dishonour suit.
Whether the lower court was justified in retaining attachment over properties sold to the appellant prior to attachment.
Parties & counsel
- appellant
NAZAR
- respondent
A.THOMAS
- respondent
RAJENDRAN
Coram
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court