JAGTAR SINGH Vs. ASHOK KUMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present revision petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India has been filed challenging the order dtd. 19/1/2012 (Annexure P-2) and order dtd. 27/9/2013 (Annexure P-3) whereby the petition filed by the defendant-petitioner herein under Sec. 95 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC) was dismissed.

(2.) The facts relevant to the present lis are that the plaintiffrespondent had filed Civil Suit No.41 of 11/2/2002 against the defendantpetitioner titled as Ashok Kumar Vs. Jagtar Singh for recovery of Rs.1,83,600.00. Vide judgment and decree dtd. 8/6/2006 the said suit was decreed for recovery of Rs.36,000.00. The defendant-petitioner approached the Trial Court by filing a petition under Sec. 95 CPC for recovery of compensation to the tune of Rs.50,000.00 on the ground that the application for attachment of his property before the judgment was filed on insufficient grounds. It is apt to note that as is clear from the impugned order, Annexure P-2, the Court on an application under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 CPC and Order 38 Rule 5 CPC ordered the attachment of the property granting liberty to furnish security to the tune of Rs.2,00,000.00 within one month to avoid such attachment. Till then, the defendant-petitioner was restrained from alienating the property. The defendant-petitioner in his written statement filed in Civil Suit No.41 of 11/2/2002 had not denied that there were some transactions between the parties. It is, however, his stand that an amount of Rs.1,34,000.00 stood paid by him. The Trial Court vide judgment and decree dtd. 8/6/2006 decreed Civil Suit No.41 of 11/2/2002 for Rs.36,000.00. The defendant-petitioner thereafter filed a petition under Sec. 95 CPC for recovery of compensation to the tune of Rs.50,000.00 for wrongful attachment of his property.

(3.) Learned counsel for the defendant-petitioner would contend that his case is squarely covered under the provisions of Sec. 95 CPC and that the attachment of the property was sought without sufficient cause.