In an ordinary original civil jurisdiction application seeking to raise a previous attachment order, the court dismissed the petition because the applicant's affidavit failed to disclose that the underlying suit was decreed and that all dues and conditions were settled.
Application to raise the order of attachment is dismissed.
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
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
(ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
TUESDAY, THE 02ND DAY OF NOVEMBER 2021
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE N.SESHASAYEE
A.No.3888 of 2021 IN C.S.454 of 2014
Mr. P. Munuswamy, Son of Parthasarathy, 17/9, Bashyam Street, Vetri Nagar, Chennai – 600 082. ...Plaintiff
VS G. Vijayalakshmi, Wife of Late Kavadi Gopi, No. 26/11, Bajanai Koil Street, Sembium, Chennai – 600 011. ...Defendant
A.No.3888 of 2021: G. Vijayalakshmi, Wife of Late Kavadi Gopi, No. 26/11, Bajanai Koil Street, Sembium, Chennai – 600 011. ...Applicant / Defendant -VsMr. P. Munuswamy, Son of Parthasarathy, 17/9, Bashyam Street, https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ Vetri Nagar, Chennai – 600 082. ..Respondent / Plaintiff
2
Application praying that this Hon'ble Court be pleased to raise the order of attachment of immovable property dated 23.09.2014 in Application No. 4509 of 2014 in CS. No. 454 of 2014.
This Application coming on this day before this court for hearing, the Court made the following order:
No representation for the plaintiff. This Court finds that the suit itself has been decreed on 08.01.2018.
2.This Court perused the affidavit filed in support of this application. The affidavit does not disclose the judgment of this Court dated 08.01.2018. This Court has recorded in its judgment that the defendant was set exparte for not filing his written statement on 26.03.2015. Therefore, the defendant had filed the written statement admitting a portion of the suit claim and that on 29.04.2015 the exparte order was set aside on condition that the defendant pays a sum of Rs.5 lakhs by 02.06.2015 and another sum of Rs.5 lakhs by 02.07.2015. These amounts were paid and subsequently the matter
was posted for trial before the learned Additional Master No.3 and before the learned Additional Master No.3, the defendant chose not to contest the suit, accordingly, the suit came to be decreed by this Court. This Court had
directed the defendant to pay a sum of Rs.13 lakhs after giving credit to the https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/
tune of 10 lakhs, which the defendant has deposited with interest. None of
3
these material facts find place in the affidavit filed in support of this
application. The application is absolutely inadequate in the matter of setting the facts that have already been taken place.
3.Inasmuch as the applicant had suppressed the material particulars, this court is not inclined to allow this application. This application stands dismissed accordingly, but with liberty to the applicant to come out with an application with better material particulars.
Sd./-NSSJ 02.11.2021
//Certified to be true copy//
Dated at Madras this the day of 2021.
COURT OFFICER(O.S.) From 25th day of September 2008 the Registry is issuing certified copies of the Orders/Judgments/Decrees in this format.
PS 18/11/2021
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the application to raise an attachment order should be allowed when the supporting affidavit suppressed material facts regarding a prior decree and settlement.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Mr. P. Munuswamy
G. Vijayalakshmi
N. Seshasayee
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
