VINOD R Vs. ARCHANA SUKU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS Original Petition is filed, seeking a direction to set aside Ext.P10 order passed in I.A.1338/2011 on the file of the Family Court, Thiruvananthapuram.

(2.) BRIEFLY put the case of the petitioners is as follows: Petitioners are respondents 1 to 3 in O.P.1292/2009 on the file of the Family Court, Thiruvananthapuram. The first respondent instituted the said Original Petition, seeking maintenance for herself and the second respondent. She claimed various amounts allegedly due to her by way of gold ornaments and dowry. She also filed an application for attachment of the properties belonging to the petitioners. Notice was issued by the Family Court, which was received by the petitioners on 22.12.2009. They were directed to answer the allegations and furnish security for an amount of Rs.10 lakhs on or before 11.1.2010. The petitioners 1 and 3 are business men in the city of Thiruvanthapuram and they own various items of properties and the properties stand mortgaged to various financial institutions, from whom financial assistance is obtained. On account of the order of attachment passed, the financial institutions sought return of loans. The petitioners filed W.P.(C) 636/2010, challenging the encumbrances marked in Ext.P7 by the Sub Registrar. They also filed an application before the Family Court, for lifting the order of attachment. It is the said application, which has been rejected.

(3.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioners would point out that in fact the petitioners are prepared to furnish security in the form of bank guarantee. We notice that essentially two reasons are given; firstly, that the petitioners 2 and 3 are father and mother of the husband of the first respondent and are also liable if the petition is allowed. Secondly, it is stated that filing of the application to lift attachment of 'D' schedule property was not mentioned in the petition or affidavit.