RAMAN TECH. & PROCESS ENGG. CO. & ANR. versus SOLANKI TRADERS

RAMAN TECH. & PROCESS ENGG. CO. & ANR. versus SOLANKI TRADERS

Attachment before judgment or direction for security under Order 38 Rule 5 requires a prima facie case by the plaintiff and proof that the defendant is acting to defeat execution of a possible decree. In absence of a prima facie case, the court should not exercise such power.

Parties
Appellant: Raman Tech. & Process Engg. Co.; Respondent: Solanki Traders
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
20 November 2007
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal Against High Court Order in Revisional Jurisdiction
Outcome
appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Attachment Before Judgment, Security for Suit Claim
Civil Procedure Attachment Before Judgment Security for Suit Claim

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Raman Tech. & Process Engg. Co.

Appellant

Solanki Traders

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal Against High Court Order in Revisional Jurisdiction

Legal Issues

  1. 1 When should courts exercise the power to direct defendants to furnish security for suit claims under Order 38 Rule 5 CPC
  2. 2 Conditions for granting attachment before judgment

Ratio Decidendi

Attachment before judgment or direction for security under Order 38 Rule 5 requires a prima facie case by the plaintiff and proof that the defendant is acting to defeat execution of a possible decree. In absence of a prima facie case, the court should not exercise such power.

Court Disposition

appeal allowed

Orders

  • Order of High Court set aside
  • Order of Trial Court restored