AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
By means of this petition, the petitioner has prayed that the opp. parties may be directed not to attach the personal property of the petitioner and his wife.
Learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for have been heard. Learned Standing counsel was given time to seek instructions, but no instructions have been received so far by him.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that the where a bouts of his son Kohit Tandon are not known for the last four years. His son has no selfacquired property and the entire property belongs lo the petitioner. The scooter is also in the name of the wife of the petitioner, who is the registered owner of the same. It appears that a case has been registered against the son of the petitioner under Sections 120B and 408, I.P.C. at P.S. Hara Street. Calcutta on 4121992 and a warrant of arrest has also been issued by the police of Calcutta. Now the police is going to attach the properties belonging to the petitioner threading as the property of the son of the petitioner. It is further argued that the petitioner has sent a telegram to C.J.M. Lucknow and to Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Calcutta and also got published in the newspaper.
After hearing the learned counsel for the parties it is directed that the properties belonging to the petitioner or his wife shall not be attached against any rules issued against Rohit Tandon.
With these observations the writ petition is disposed of finally.