OUSEPH THOMAKUTTY Vs. RAJAMBAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE short question in this case is whether an attachment effected prior to judgment is valid and subsisting.

(2.) IN a suit pending before the court of the Munsiff of Cochin an attachment before judgment was sought. The properties sought to be attached lay within the jurisdiction of the court of the Munsiff of Ponani and therefore the warrant of, attachment was sent to that court through the district Court at Ernakulam. The warrant was not sent through the District Court of Kozhikode as contemplated by S. 136 of the Code of Civil Procedure. The attachment was effected without any objection and it was also confirmed by the Cochin court without any objection. The suit was finally decreed and when proceedings in execution in pursuance of the attachment were started, objection was taken that the attachment was invalid, because the warrant of attachment was not sent by the Cochin court through the district Court of Kozhikode. This objection was over-ruled by the primary court, but was upheld by the learned Subordinate judge. The correctness of that order is being canvassed in the Second Appeal.