AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
No AI summary yet
Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.
Judgment
5 paragraphs · 197 wordsC.S Dias, J
Aggrieved by Ext P1 order passed by the Court of the Subordinate Judge, Pathanamthitta in IA No.2/2021 in LAR No.2/2007, the respondents 1, 4 and 8 in the application have filed the original petition. The respondents are the petitioner/State and the other respondents in the application.
A reading of Ext P2 notice shows that it is issued under Order 38 Rule 5 of the Code of Civil Procedure (in short ‘Code’) calling upon the petitioners and the respondents 2 to 6 to show cause why an order of attachment shall not be passed. Subsequently, the court below has made the conditional order of attachment absolute, as provided under Order 38 Rule 6 of the Code.
An order passed under Order 38 Rule 6 of the Code is appealable under Order 43 Rule 1 (q) of the Code. Moreover, it is seen that, alleging inadequacy of compensation, the petitioners have filed LAA No.259/2018 before this Court.
In view of the alternative statutory remedy available to the petitioners under the Code, the original petition is dismissed, without prejudice to the right of the petitioners to work out their remedies, in accordance with law.