GOKULDAS Vs. ABHILASH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS original petition arises from Ext.P4, order dated October 14, 2010 on I.A.No.8815 of 2010 in O.S.No.1237 of 2010 of the court of learned Additional Sub Judge-I, Thrissur. Respondent instituted the suit against petitioner for recovery of money and apprehending that petitioner might abscond or leave the local limits of jurisdiction of the court below, moved I.A.No.8113 of 2010 to arrest petitioner. On that application learned Sub Judge issued warrant of arrest as provided under Rule 1(b) of Order XXXVIII of the Code of Civil Procedure (for short, " the Code). Learning about the warrant of arrest petitioner filed I.A.No.8815 of 2010 to recall the warrant. That application was dismissed by the learned Sub Judge by Ext.P4, order which is under challenge. When this matter came up for admission, vide order dated 21-10-2010 while staying operation of the order under challenge I directed petitioner not to leave the country and to produce his passport in the court below on or before 29-10-2010. Learned counsel submitted that since the passport has been given to the representative of his employer for visa processing, it is not so far returned and hence petitioner was not able to produce passport in the court below as ordered by this court of 21-10-2010. Learned counsel submits that petitioner has produced the sale deed in respect of his property in the court below and is prepared to offer the said property as security but, learned Sub Judge has not passed final order on I.A.No.8113 of 2010. Learned counsel states that petitioner undertakes not to go out of local limits of jurisdiction of court below until I.A.No.8113 of 2010 is disposed of and that petitioner is prepared to file an affidavit in that line. Learned counsel for respondent contended that petitioner has not furnished security as ordered by the court below and invited my attention to Ext.P4, order.

(2.) IT is not clear from Ext.P4, order whether there was any order of the court below to furnish security. What is revealed from paragraph 5 of Ext.P4, order is that sufficient opportunity was given to the petitioner to furnish security and that it has not so been done. Either way I.A.No.8113 of 2010 remains to be disposed of. In the meantime that petitioner does not go beyond local limits of the court below can be ensured by directing him to file an affidavit in the court below in that line. Resultantly this petition is disposed of directing the court below to dispose of I.A.No.8113 of 2010. Petitioner shall get opportunity to furnish security if the court so orders. The court shall consider whether security if any furnished by petitioner is sufficient. Petitioner shall not go beyond local limits of court below until I.A.No.8113 of 2010 is disposed of. He shall file an affidavit in that line in the court below within two weeks from this day. Court below shall dispose of I.A.No.8113 of 2010 within one month from this day. Interim order against arrest of petitioner issued by this court will remain in force until I.A.No.8113 of 2010 is disposed of.