SHAIK SUBHANI Vs. VELISALA YEDUKONDALU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The respondent herein had filed O.S.No.128 of 2021 before the Junior Civil Judge, Piduguralla, for recovery of an amount of Rs.5,00,000.00 with interest against the petitioners herein. He also filed I.A.No.220 of 2021 under Order XXXVIII Rule 5 C.P.C., seeking attachment of schedule property of the petitioners. The trial Court by order dated 20/07/2021 ordered conditional attachment directing the petitioners to furnish security equivalent to the suit amount within 72 hours, failing which attachment order would be made absolute. Aggrieved by the said order, the petitioners had approached this Court by way of this revision petition.

(2.) The petitioners were permitted to take out personal notice to the respondents and had filed proof of service, which showed that the notice sent to the respondent was refused by the respondent. In the circumstances, the said service shall be treated as service of notice on the respondent.

(3.) Smt. Manikyaveena, learned counsel appearing on behalf of Sri Naganjaneyulu Borra, learned counsel for the petitioner, relies upon a judgment of the erstwhile High Court of Andhra Pradesh reported in Vemulapalli Ravichandra vs. Mattampalli Srinivasa Rao1 to contend that an order of this nature could not have been given without notice to the petitioners and without giving them an opportunity to set out their objections for attachment of their property.