Research › Search › Judgment

Andhra High Court · body

2022 DIGILAW 38 (AP)

Kasturi Chandra Sekhar v. M V Prasad

2022-01-06

R.RAGHUNANDAN RAO

body2022
ORDER : The respondent had filed O.S.No.49 of 2020 in the Court of the Principal Senior Civil Judge, Kurnool against the petitioners herein for recovery of Rs.23,00,000/- on the basis of a promissory note. He also filed I.A.No.280 of 2020 for attaching certain properties. The trial Court by an order, dated 15.11.2020, directed the petitioners to furnish security of suit amount within two days from the time of receiving the notice failing which attachment would come into effect. 2. Aggrieved by the said order, the petitioners approached this Court by way of this civil revision petition. 3. Sri K.Rathanga Pani Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioners, would draw the attention of this Court to the schedule set out in I.A.No.280 of 2020. This schedule clearly shows that the immovable properties sought to be attached belongs to Kasturi Educational Society. There is also a correction by placing brackets around Kasturi Educational Society showing Kasturi School of Excellence. 4. Sri K.Rathanga Pani Reddy would submit that the trial Court was granting attachment of property belonging to the society while the debt is said to have been incurred by the petitioners, who are at best members of the society. He submits that such an attachment would not be permissible. Sri M.Siva Kumar, learned counsel for the respondent, would rely upon the judgments of Hon’ble Supreme Court in Rajendran and others vs. Shankar Sundaram and others, (2008) 2 SCC 724 and of Hon’ble High Court of Orissa in Sk.Sahid vs. Smt. Tehera Husna, AIR 2001 Orissa 6. 5. Sri M.Siva Kumar would draw the attention of this Court specifically to paragraphs 11, 12 and 14 of the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court and paragraph 11 of the judgment of the High Court of Orissa to contend that the order was only a conditional order and as such does not require any interference. He would submit that the order of attachment would come into effect only upon giving non-furnishing of security by the petitioners herein and in any event, the said order was only a conditional order and as such, it is not an order which requires the interference of this Court. 6. A perusal of the schedule given in the petition clearly shows that the immovable properties sought to be attached belongs to the educational society. 6. A perusal of the schedule given in the petition clearly shows that the immovable properties sought to be attached belongs to the educational society. A society is a separate independent juristic entity and the property of the society cannot be attached for recovery of amounts due from the members of the society. 7. In these circumstances, the order of the trial Court, dated 05.11.2020, is set aside to the extent of ordering attachment of the property belonging to the society. 8. The Civil Revision Petition is, accordingly, allowed. There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending shall stand closed.