BACHALA NARAPA REDDY Vs. KASUNURU BALA OBAIAH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) No representation on behalf of the respondent Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner.

(2.) Bachala Narapa Reddy (died) by his L.Rs. vs. Kasunuru Bala Obaiah This Civil Revision Petition is directed against the order passed by the learned Junior Civil Judge, Tadipatri dated 27-10-99 in IA.No. 268/99 in O.S.No. 161/99 under which the house of the defendant was ordered to be attached under Order 38 Rule 5 of CPC.

(3.) Bachala Narapa Reddy (died) by his L.Rs. vs. Kasunuru Bala Obaiah The learned Counsel for the petitioner challenges this order on the ground that the house of an agriculturist in which he resides and the agricultural implements are kept, could not have been ordered to tie attached under Order 38 Rule 5 CPC, The learned Civil Judge brushed aside that objection and held that the exemption to the house of an agriculturist available under proviso (c) to Section 60(1) CPC. is not applicable to attachment before judgment under Order 38 Rule 5 CPC. This question is squarely covered by a judgment of this Court in the case of O. Laxmireddy vs. Vadla Veeraiah wherein His Lordship B.S. Raikote, J held that benefits conferred by Section 60(1) CPC proviso could be pressed into service even at the time when attachment before judgment is sought under Order 38 Rule 5, CPC. I am in respectful agreement with this view and inview of this judgment the order passed by the learned Civil Judge refusing protection in respect of the house of an agriculturist cannot be sustained.