The High Court dismissed the revision petition challenging the attachment of properties under Order 38 Rule 5 CPC. The court held the lower court's reasoning for securing loan recovery was legal.
Dismissed the revision petition.
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.
Manoj Kumar IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND 2013.08.05 14:22I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
C.R. No.3525 of 2013 (O&M)
Date of Decision: 2.8.2013
Subhash Sehgal
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus
Smt. Sushma Choudhary and Ors.
....Respondent(s)
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASWANT SINGH
Present: Mr. Ram Chander, Advocate for the petitioner. JASWANT SINGH, J (ORAL)
Petitioner-defendant No.3 is in revision primarily aggrieved against the order dated 3.1.2011 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Sr. Division), Kurukshetra whereby on the application of the plaintiff under Order 38 Rule 5 CPC, the property of defendant No.3 has been attached on the premise that at the time of raising of rent by defendant Nos.1 & 2, he was the partner of defendant No.1.
Even otherwise, it is noticed that defendant No.3 is the father of defendant No.2, who is stated to be the proprietor of defendant No.1 after its alleged dissolution.
After hearing learned counsel for the petitioner, I find that the reasoning adopted by the learned trial Court for securing the recovery of the loan amount suffers from no illegality.
Dismissed.
August 02, 2013 ( JASWANT SINGH ) manoj JUDGE
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the reasoning of the trial court for attaching property under Order 38 Rule 5 CPC suffers from illegality.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Manoj Kumar
Smt. Sushma Choudhary and Ors.
Jaswant Singh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
