R. RAMESH Vs. R. RAVEENDER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is filed against the fair and decreetal order dated 18.03.2013 passed in I.A No 203 of 2013 in O.S No 44 of 2013 passed by the Principal District Judge, Tiruppur.

(2.) The suit for recovery of money to the tune of Rs.55,46,000/- was filed by the plaintiff based on promissory note and a dishonoured cheque issued by the appellant. An interim Application under Order XXXVIII Rule 5 and section 151 of of the Code of Civil Procedure was also filed by the plaintiff for a direction to the defendant to furnish security failing which to attach the schedule mentioned property in the application alleging that the appellant was attempting to alienate the property. It appears from the records that an exparte direction was given to the appellant to furnish security for Rs.65,00,000/-. The defendant immediately, upon receipt of the order, seems to have filed a counter questioning the liability and also placing the fact and documents to show that the property was already under mortgage with the Indian Overseas Bank and sought for dismissal of the application. The Trial Court, after hearing the parties, has allowed the application attaching the property of the defendant. Aggrieved, the defendant has filed this appeal.

(3.) The Learned counsel for the appellant vehemently assailed the orders of the Trial Court contending that unless the respondent establishes with specific references, the property of the appellant cannot be attached. The Counsel further contended that in view of the fact that the properties were mortgaged with Indian Overseas Bank, the appellant cannot dispose of the property without clearing the loan. The counsel further contended that once the defendant appears and shows cause and furnishes reasons with documents in support of his contentions, the court must reconsider its earlier decisions and not mechanically pass orders. The counsel for the appellant has also relied upon the following judgments:-