IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN MONDAY, THE 7TH JANUARY 2008 / 17TH POUSHA 1929 WP(C).No. 632 of 2008(A) ------------------------------------- PETITIONER: --------------------- JOY FRANCIS ALIAS T.P.JOY, S/O.PORINJU, THALACHIRA VEEDU, KURIYACHIRA, CHIYYARAM VILLAGE, THRISSUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.SAJAN VARGHEESE K. RESPONDENT: ----------------------- P.K.SEYD, S/O.ABOOBACKER, ANWAR MANZIL, 56, CHANDRA NAGAR, CHANDRA NAGAR P.O., KUNNANOOR AMSOM, PALAKKAD. BY THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 07/01/2008,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss M.N.KRISHNAN, J. -------------------------- W.P.(C). NO. 632 OF 2008 --------------------- Dated this the 7th day of January, 2008 J U D G M E N T This writ petition is preferred against the order passed by the Subordinate Judge, Palakkad, whereby it has lifted the order of attachment on deposit of Rs. 3,15,000/-. The grievance of the writ petitioner is that the court has not ordered to furnish security for future interest and cost. The suit inclusive of interest up to the date of institution of the suit comes only to Rs.2,89,000/-. The court below has directed the party to furnish security for Rs.3,15,000/- and it is only on deposit of that amount the attachment has been lifted. At the stage of interim attachment, the court is mainly concerned with the claim in the suit and the court cannot decide whether it is going to award future interest at the rate of 12% or that the party is entitled to the full cost etc. The import of order XXXVIII Rule 5 is to give a reasonable security to the plaintiff, who instituted the suit, so that he is not deprived of the main usufructs of the decree, which he is going to obtain subsequently. I think the court below has approached the subject only in the correct perspective and therefore the order does not suffer from any infirmity. The writ petition is accordingly dismissed. M.N.KRISHNAN, JUDGE vps