SIVAJI JAGANNATHAN Vs. HASSAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The plaintiff in O.S.No.874/2011 has filed this Original Petition, impugning Ext.P2 order, as per which, the title documents of a property belonging to the respondents have been ordered to be returned to them.

(2.) According to the petitioner, he had filed the plaint on the assertion that the defendants had entered into an agreement of sale with respect to the property in question and had also delivered to him the original of the title document, namely document No.698/2007 of the Maradu SRO. He says that subsequent to the filing of the suit, he moved an application under Order XXXVIII Rule 5 of the Code of Civil Procedure (CPC for short) seeking attachment over this and other extents of properties, so as to secure the decree that he may obtain in future; but that through an order in I.A.No.4142/2014 filed by the respondents thereafter, the said attachment over the property in question was lifted on them offering alternate security. He contends that, nevertheless, even though the attachment over the property was lifted, the Trial Court could not have ordered to release the title document to the respondents because, it is a vital piece of evidence to establish that the agreement of sale was valid and that the respondents had agreed to sell the property in question to him. The petitioner, therefore, prays that this Original Petition be allowed and Ext.P2 order be set aside.

(3.) In response to the afore submissions made on behalf of the petitioner by his learned counsel Smt.P.R.Reena, the learned Senior Counsel appearing for the respondents, Sri.P.Santhalingam, instructed by Smt.Sindhu Santhalingam, started by submitting that since the attachment over the property in question has been lifted, there is absolutely no reason why the title document should now be retained by the Court. He says that it is in such circumstances, that the Trial Court has issued Ext.P2 order ordering return of the document to his clients, which is without error and completely irreproachable. To a pointed question from this Court, the learned Senior Counsel submitted that his clients intend to sell the property or to mortgage the same to avail financial assistance and asserts that they are entitled to do so since the suit has been pending before the Trial Court for nearly a decade. He thus prays that this Original Petition be dismissed.