CHAND NAULAKHA Vs. SARASWATI BUILDERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner has filed the present revision petition assailing the order dated 13.7.1994, passed by the Additional District Judge, by - which the petitioner's applications under Order XXXVIII, Rule 5, Civil Procedure Code and under Order XXXIX, Rules 1 and 2, Civil Procedure Code was dismissed.

(2.) The essential facts for the purposes of disposal of the revision petition may be briefly noted: (i) The petitioner has instituted a suit for recovery of Rs. 2,74,000.00 on the allegation that a sum of Rs. 2,50,000.00 had been deposited with defendants concern M/s. Saraswati Builders, which would carry interest @ 18% p.a. The petitioner accordingly sued the respondents for the sum of Rs. 2,74,000.00 The petitioner moved an application under Order XXXVIII, Rule 5, Civil Procedure Code and under Order XXXIX, Rules 1 and 2, Civil Procedure Code, seeking attachment before judgment of properties as well as restraint on the respondents from selling, transferring and disposing of any of their properties viz. D-42, South Extension, Part II, New Delhi, PD-14, Nehru Enclave, Kalkaji, New Delhi and recovering rent from tenants of property No. G-1/16, Ansari Road, Darya Ganj, New Delhi.

(3.) Counsel for the petitioner has strenuously urged before me that the learned Additional District Judge while passing the impugned order did not assign any reason for not granting the relief sought under Order XXXIX, Rules 1 and 2, Civil Procedure Code, for restraint on transfer alienation. Further that the Additional District Judge had observed in the impugned order that the petitioner had failed to place on record the advertisements, which the respondents had taken out for disposing of the properties. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the said finding is against the record since one of the advertisements relating to Sahibabad land was placed on record.