O.S. No. 679/2025

Case between Andrew N J vs Athira Gold and Silks et al regarding a petition under Order 38 Rule 5 of Code of Civil Procedure.

Court

COURT OF MUNSIFF, ERNAKULAM

Judge

Sri. Nanda Krishna M

Order Date

2025-11-07

Duration

Judgement document from eCourt website

Open judgment PDF (eCourt)

Find Similar Cases

Case Summary

Andrew N J filed a petition against Athira Gold and Silks and its partners, alleging that they are intending to dispose of property to defeat potential decree execution. The court has directed the respondent to furnish security to avoid interim attachment of the property.

Judgment Outcome

Plaintiff Won

Interim Order

The court granted an interim attachment of the property and directed the respondent to furnish security amounting to 9,96,000 by a specified date.

Judgment Favored

Plaintiff

Relief Granted

Ad-interim attachment of property.

Case Type

Civil Suit

Final Judgment

Why Plaintiff Won:
The court found prima facie evidence that the respondent was trying to dispose of property to thwart execution of a potential decree.

Judgment Evidence:

Heard the petitioner. Perused the records. I am prima facie satisfied that the respondent with the intent to defeat the execution of decree that may be passed against him is trying to dispose of the attachment schedule property. Hence the respondent is directed to furnish security to the tune of 9,96,000/- on or before 19.11.2025.

Parties Involved

Plaintiffs

Andrew N J (68 years) Nirakkachery House, Kattiparambu, N J Hall, Kannamaly P O, Ernakulam District, Pin - 682 008

Defendants

Athira Gold and Silks (Age not specified years) Stella Maris Tower, Banerji Road, High Court Junction, Ernakulam, Pin - 682 031 Antony R J (58 years) Randuthaikkal House, Pallippuram P O, Ernakulam, Pin -683 515 Joseph R J (56 years) Randuthaikkal House, Pallippuram P O, Ernakulam, PIN- 683 515 Johnson R J (54 years) Randuthaikkal House, Pallippuram P O, Ernakulam, Pin- 683 515 Joby R J (52 years) Randuthaikkal House, Pallippuram P O, Ernakulam, PIN- 683 515

Reliefs

Relief Type: Mandatory Injunction

Outcome: Granted

Description:

Interim attachment of the attachment schedule property and a direction for the respondent to furnish security.

Evidence:

Hence the respondent is directed to furnish security to the tune of 9,96,000/- on or before 19.11.2025 or show cause why he should not furnish security.

Documents & Evidence

Document Type: Petition

Submitted By: Plaintiff

Relevance:

This document contains the petition filed by the plaintiff under Order 38 Rule 5 of the Code of Civil Procedure.

Reference: