CHANDULAL SERAOGI Vs. PURNA CHANDRA PAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Rule has been obtained by the plaintiff against whom damages have been awarded under the provisions of Section 95 of the Civil P. C.. It appears that the plaintiff instituted a suit to recover a sum of money from the defendant on the basis of a promissory note. After filing the suit he made an application for attachment before judgment of some immovable properties belonging to the opposite party. On January 7, 1933, the conditional order for attachment before judgment was made and that order was made final on January 10,1933. Seven days later, the opposite party came to Court, deposited the amount of the claim and the attachment was withdrawn. Later on, he did not contest the suit which was decreed without contest. Thereafter, the opposite party made an application for compensation under the provisions of Section 95 of the Code. The allegations made in the said application are recited in para. 5 of the application for revision filed in this Court but they need not be set out in detail for the purposes of the Rule.

(2.) The Court of first instance held that the claim of the opposite party was not admissible under the provisions of Section 95 and, therefore, he dismissed the application. An appeal was taken, and the lower Appellate Court has held that the opposite party is entitled to get compensation which has been assessed at Rs. 100. In delivering the judgment, the learned Subordinate Judge negatives most of the allegations on which the application under Section 95 was based. He held that the opposite party was entitled to claim compensation inasmuch as he felt humiliated and his prestige suffered by reason of the attachment before judgment effected at the instance of the petitioner.

(3.) The question before me is whether on the above findings the claim preferred is admissible under Section 95 I have not to consider here whether damages could be claimed for malicious arrest or malicious attachment in a suit properly framed. But I am dealing here with an application under Section 95 where the matter is to be summarily investigated. The whole question centres round this controversy, namely as to the precise meaning of the words Award against the plaintiff...a reasonable compensation to the defendant for the expense or injury caused to him.