ORDER: What is challenged herein is an order of the learned Subordinate Judge, Karur made in an interlocutory application seeking a direction to the petitioner herein to furnish sufficient security to the suit amounts or to attach the petition mentioned properties of the petitioner herein before judgment, pending suit. 2. It was a suit filed by the respondent herein for recovery of money. Pending suit, he filed an application of attachment before judgment and counter was filed. The said petition was allowed directing the defendant to furnish security. But, the same was not complied with. Hence, attachment order was passed under O.38, Rule 5, C.P.C. challenging the same, this petition has been filed. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner would urge that all the allegations made by the respondent are bald and do not warrant of any attachment before judgment. The lower Court has exercised its jurisdiction illegally, and hence, the order has got to be set aside. To support his contentions, he relied on the following decisions: (1) Palghar Rolling Mills Private Limited v. Visvfsvaraya Iron and Steel Limited and another, A.I.R. 1985 Karn. 282; (2) International Air Transport Association v. M/s.Hansas Travels (Pvt) Limited and another, A.I.R. 1998 Ker. 80. 4. The learned counsel for the respondent would urge that the revision itself is not maintainable, since the petitioner has got a remedy of appeal. He also relied on a decisions reported in T.R. Punnavanam Pillai v. V. Muthusami Achari, A.I.R. 1962 Mad. 444. The decision relied on by the respondent is applicable to the present case. Under the stated circumstances, the Court is of the view that when an appeal remedy is available to the petitioner, the revision petition could not be entertained. Hence, the revision petition has got to be dismissed. 5. Accordingly, this revision petition is dismissed. However, liberty is given to the petitioner to move the concerned appellate forum, if he desires to challenge the order of the lower Court, and if done so, the time consumed in this revision proceedings shall be considered by the concerned appellate forum while considering the question as to the period of limitation. consequently, connected C.M.P. is also dismissed.