Petitioner challenged an interim attachment order under Article 227 CrPC. Apex Court directed Sub Judge to consider caveator's objections before finalizing order.
The Sub Judge Neyyattinkara to consider objection and hear parties before making interim order absolute.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.RAMAKRISHNAN
FRIDAY, THE 5TH DAY OF AUGUST 2016/14TH SRAVANA, 1938
OP(C).No. 1706 of 2016 (O)
--------------------------(IA.NO.551/2016 IN OS.NO. 27/2016 OF SUB COURT, NEYYATTINKARA)
PETITIONER/DEFENDANT :
CHRISTINAL @ CHRISTI, D/O. ESILY, UMR-10, TC-11/1575(1), BETHEL HOUSE, KAWDIAR, TRIVANDRUM.
BY ADVS.SRI.R.SUNIL KUMAR SMT.A.SALINI LAL
RESPONDENT :
STEPHEN, S/O. PONNAYYAN, KAMALA COTTAGE, THUDALI, MYLACHAL, KEEZHAROOR, NEYYATTINKARA, TRIVANDRUM. PIN-695 121
THIS OP (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 05-08-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
sts
OP(C).No. 1706 of 2016 (O)
APPENDIX
PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS
EXT. P1 COPY OF THE PLAINT OS. NO. 27/2016 EXT. P2 COPY OF I.A NO. 551/2016. EXT. P3 COPY OF THE CAVEAT NO. 40/2016 EXT. P4 COPY OF THE MEMO AS WELL AS THE POSTAL RECEIPT. EXT. P5 COPY OF THE ORDER IN I.A NO. 551/2016. EXT. P6 COPY OF OBJECTION IN I.A NO. 551/2016.
RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS: NIL
/TRUE COPY/
P.A.TO JUDGE
sts
K.RAMAKRISHNAN, J.
=================== O.P.(C) No.1706 of 2016
=======================
Dated this the 5th day of August, 2016
JUDGMENT
This petition is filed by the petitioner for setting aside Ext.P5
order passed in I.A. No.551 of 2016 in O.S.No.27 of 2016 on the
file of Sub Court, Neyyattinkara under Article 227 of the Constitution of India.
fact that he filed caveat, he was not given a breathing time to file
objection and he wanted final order to be passed only after considering his objection to the petition. So this petition has been
O.P.(C) No.1706 of 2016 -2-
filed seeking the following relief:
“To call for the records pertaining to Exbt.P-5 order and to set aside the same”.
only a direction to the court below to pass final orders after considering his objections in the petition.
passed. Further, a reading of Ext.P5 order will go to show that only an interim order was passed with a direction to the respondent to show cause as to why he should not furnish security. That shows that no final order has been passed in the petition. So the apprehension of the petitioner that the court will pass final order without considering his objections is without any basis. Further this Court has issued a direction on admission to
O.P.(C) No.1706 of 2016 -3-
the Sub Court Neyyattinkara to consider Ext.P6 objection before making Ext.P5 order absolute as well. That direction will be sufficient to remove the apprehension on the part of the petitioner
that the court below will pass final orders without considering the objection. So the original petition is disposed of as follows:-
The Sub Judge Neyyattinkara is directed to consider Ext.P6 objection before making Ext.P5 order absolute and after hearing both sides and pass appropriate orders in I.A. No.551 of 2016 in O.S. No.27 of 2014 pending before that court in accordance with law as expeditiously as possible, at any rate within one months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.
With the above directions and observations this Original
Petition (Civil) is disposed of.
Registry is directed to communicate this judgment to the
court below at the earliest.
K.RAMAKRISHNAN, JUDGE
SKV
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the sub-courts could pass an interim attachment order without giving a final hearing on objections to application for attachment.
Whether the interim attachment order passed without considering objections could be treated as absolute order.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Christinal @ Christi
Stephen
K. Ramakrishnan
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
