IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KURIAN JOSEPH & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN TUESDAY, THE 2ND DECEMBER 2008 / 11TH AGRAHAYANA 1930 RFA.No. 811 of 2008() --------------------- AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 31/10/2008 IN I.A 7494/2008 IN OS.1341/2008 of PRL.SUB COURT,THRISSUR .................... (S): APPELLANT/1ST RESPONDENT/PLAINTIFF ------------------------------------------------------ SUN CORPORATION, REP. BY ITS PROPRIETOR V.P.KRISHNA KUMAR AGED 41 YEARS, S/O. A.R.PISHARADY, PROPRIETOR SUN INCORPORATION HARI VIHAR, SHASTA NAGAR, PATTURAIKAL TRICHUR. BY ADV. SRI.RAJIT SRI.RANJIT BABU RESPONDENT(S): CLAIM PETITIONER & DEFENDANT/DEFENDANT ----------------------------------------------------- 1. USHA VARGHESE CHAKOLA, AGED 53 YEARS, W/O.VARGHESE CHACKOLA HOUSE, NO.IX/199, BETHLY LANE, MISSION QUARTERS, THRISSUR 2. PAUL CHAKOLA AGED 35 YEARS, S/O.VARGHESE CHACOLA, PROPRIETOR, CHAKOLA AYURVEDICS 7/653 ANDI ROAD, NENGALI, CALICUT, RESIDING AT CHAKOLA HOUSE, BETHLY LANE, MISSION QUARTERS, TRICHUR. ADV. SRI.P.SANTHOSH (PODUVAL) FOR CAVEATOR THIS REGULAR FIRST APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 02/12/2008,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: KURIAN JOSEPH & K.T.SANKARAN, JJ. ---------------------------------------------- R.F.A. No.811 of 2008 ---------------------------------------------- Dated 2nd December, 2008. J U D G M E N T Sankaran, J. Sun Corporation, the appellant herein, filed O.S.1341/2008 against the second respondent, Mr.Paul Chakola for realization of money. An application for attachment before judgment was filed. The court below passed an order of attachment. The first respondent Smt.Usha Varghese Chakola filed I.A.7494/2008 praying that the attachment may be lifted. She stated that she is the owner of the property which was attached. The court below, by the order impugned in this appeal, allowed the application. 2. The order impugned is very cryptic. The contentions raised by the parties are not considered. It is stated by the appellant that the appellant did not get a copy of the will which was produced by the claimant. This is disputed by the learned counsel appearing for the claimant. It is stated by him that along with the claim petition, the document was produced and a copy of the same was supplied to the appellant. 3. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that RFA NO.811/08 2 another document was also produced by the claimant and without giving an opportunity to the appellant to get instruction in the matter or to file a counter, the matter was posted on 31.10.2008, and the order impugned was passed on that day. 4. On a perusal of the order impugned, it can be seen that the court below has not properly considered the dispute between the parties. The rival contentions of the parties have not been adverted to, and a finding thereon has not been entered into. The appendix does not indicate that documents were produced. The parties also were not afforded an opportunity to produce documents. For the above reason, the order impugned is set aside. The court below shall consider I.A.7494/08 afresh and pass a reasoned order. The appeal is disposed of as above. KURIAN JOSEPH, JUDGE. K.T.SANKARAN, JUDGE. tgs KURIAN JOSEPH & K.T.SANKARAN, JJ ---------------------------------------------- R.F.A. No.811 of 2008 ---------------------------------------------- J U D G M E N T Dated 2nd December, 2008.