The Madras High Court dismissed a civil revision petition challenging an order closing an attachment before judgment application. The court held that the order was validly based on the petitioner's specific undertaking in her counter-affidavit not to alienate the pledged property.
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.
1
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED 10.01.2014
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.KIRUBAKARAN
C.R.P(PD)(MD)No.75 of 2014 and
M.P(MD)No.2 of 2014
M.Sasi Rekha
.. Petitioner/Respondent/Defendant
Vs.
P.Saravana Pandian .. Respondent/Petitioner/Plaintiff
PRAYER: Civil Revision Petition is filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India against the fair and decreetal order dated 05.10.2013 made in I.A.No.39 of 2013 in O.S.No.25 of 2013 on the file of the Principal District Court, Theni.
For Petitioner : Mr.J.Selvam
ORDER
The petitioner is aggrieved by the order passed by the trial Court in closing the attachment before Judgment application filed by the respondent stating that the petitioner herein gave a specific undertaking that she would not alienate or encumber the property. Accordingly, the said order was passed on 05.10.2013.
“5. I submit that I have no intention to alienate the
property described in the petition as alleged in the plaint, because already I have pledged the property to the Karur Vysya Bank, Bodinayakanur Branch and I hereby undertake not to alienate or encumber the property till the disposal of the suit.”
https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 4. Therefore, the impugned order is passed based on paragraph No.5 of the counter affidavit filed by the petitioner. Accordingly, the Civil Revision Petition fails and the same stands dismissed.
2
Assistant Registrar( T & P)
/True Copy/
Sub Assistant Registrar
To
The Principal District Court, Theni.
+1cc to Mr. J.Selvam Advocate Sr.No.7483 ps AA/17.02.2014/2p-3c/
C.R.P(PD)(MD)No.75 of 2014
10.01.2014
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the impugned order closing the attachment before judgment application in a suit for money recovery can be challenged via a civil revision petition.
Whether there is sufficient evidence to deny that the petitioner gave an undertaking not to alienate the property.
M. Sasi Rekha
P. Saravana Pandian
N. Kirubakaran
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
