Court granted an order of attachment against respondents who failed to furnish security directed earlier in an application. Application stood closed.
Order of attachment passed against respondents; application closed.
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
Application No.3702 of 2019
PUSHPA SATHYANARAYANA, J.
This Court, upon hearing the learned counsel for the applicant, vide order dated 07.06.2019, directed the respondents to furnish
security to the extent of the claim made in the application being an amount of Rs.1,03,983/-, on or before 05.07.2019, failing which, an order of attachment order would be passed.
counsel for the applicant would submit that no security has been furnished as directed by this Court. He would further submit that an
award in arbitration between the applicant and the respondent has
been passed on 18.10.2019.
endorsement 'insufficient address' and affidavit of service is also filed
to that effect enclosing returned covers. Though the names of the respondents are printed in the cause list, there is no representation for them either in person or through counsel. Hence, service to the
2
PUSHPA SATHYANARAYANA, J.
pnn
respondents is held sufficient. In the above circumstances, there shall be an order of attachment as prayed for. The order of attachment shall be transmitted through the District and Sessions Judge, Sambalpur, Orissa and the attachment order may be hand delivered to the applicant for transmission.
PUSHPA SATHYANARAYANA
RESPONDENTS
PUSHPA SATHYANARAYANA
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
