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
6 paragraphs · 271 wordsDr. Kauser Edappagath, J
Exts.P1 and P2 orders passed by the Commercial Court, North Paravur (for short “Trial Court”) are under challenge in this Original Petition. The petitioners are the defendants and the respondent is the plaintiff in the suit.
The plaintiff moved an application for interim attachment before the Trial Court. The Trial Court passed Ext.P1 order under Order XXXVIII Rule 5 of the Code of Civil Procedure directing the petitioner to furnish security or to show cause why security shall not be furnished. A conditional attachment was also granted. Thereafter, the petitioner entered appearance and filed counter statement opposing the attachment application. After hearing both sides, the trial court passed final order under Order XXXVIII Rule 6 of CPC making the interim attachment absolute. It is challenging both Exts.P1 and P2, now the petitioners are before this Court.
I have heard Sri.Shaju Francis, the learned counsel for the petitioners.
The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that Ext.P1 order was passed without complying with sub-rule (1) of Order XXXVIII and hence it is void. However, the fact remains that subsequently Ext.P2 order was passed. It is a final order under Order XXXVIII Rule 6. Hence, Ext.P1 order merged with Ext.P2. Ext.P2 is appealable.
The remedy open to the petitioners is to file an appeal against Ext.P2. Reserving the said right, this Original Petition is dismissed. The petitioners are free to take up all the contentions raised in this Original Petition in the appeal. The petitioners are granted two weeks time from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment to prefer the appeal.