Respondent filed suit for recovery of Rs. 23 lakhs with attachment before judgment. Petitioner applied to raise attachment, offering alternative property. Trial Court rejected offer as insufficient value. Revision dismissed.
Civil Revision Petition dismissed; no order as to costs; file stayed open if further security offered.
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.
HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE L. NARASIMHA REDDY CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.1028 OF 2013
ORDER:
Respondent filed O.S. No.354 of 2012 in the Court of Principal District Judge, Vishakapatnam, against the petitioner for recovery of about Rs.23.00 lakhs. He has also filed I.A. No.2221 of 2012 under Order – XXXVIII Rule – 5 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (for short “CPC”) for attachment of an item of immovable property before judgment.
The trial Court passed an order of ad interim attachment.
2. Petitioner filed I.A. No.2967 of 2012 under Rule – 9 of Order – XXXVIII of CPC with a prayer to raise the attachment. He offered another item of property as third party security. The trial Court was not satisfied with the offer made by the petitioner and dismissed the interlocutory application through order dated 28-01-2013. Hence, this revision.
3. Heard Sri S.V.R. Subrahmanyam, learned counsel for the petitioner.
4. The very purpose of obtaining attachment before judgment is to ensure that the decree, if passed in the suit, does not go waste or the decree holder does not face any problems. In case, petitioner wanted the attachment to be raised, he was under obligation to give alternative security to the satisfaction of the Court. The record discloses that what is offered by the petitioner as security is a building in an area of hardly 50 square yards. It is difficult to accept the value of that building to be Rs.23.00 lakhs. The trial Court has taken correct view of the matter.
5. Therefore, the Civil Revision Petition is dismissed. However, this order does not preclude the petitioner to offer any other
item of property as security and in case the trial Court is satisfied with the same, it shall pass appropriate order. If the petitioner offers any other item of property over and above what was offered through the present I.A. including a portion of the attached property, the same shall be considered on merits. The observations made by the trial Court be it as regard desirability of furnishing bank guarantee or filing of applications, cannot be treated as final. There shall be no order as to costs.
6. Consequently, the Miscellaneous Petition filed in this revision shall stand disposed of.
______________________ L. NARASIMHA REDDY, J
April 17, 2013. PV
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the security offered by the petitioner to raise the attachment before judgment satisfies the trial court's requirements.
2 provisions across 1 enactments
Petitioner
Respondent
L. Narasimha Reddy
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
