HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH C.R.P.NO.3595 OF 2010 Dt.8.10.2010 Between: R.Hemaprasad and others ..Petitioners And P.Mohanswamy ..Respondent HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH C.R.P.NO.3595 OF 2010 ORDER: Petitioners herein are defendants in the suit filed by the respondent-plaintiff for recovery of a sum of Rs.39,898/-. The respondent-plaintiff filed I.A.No.237 of 2008 for attachment of the amount in the other suit and the said petition was allowed. To raise the said attachment, the petitioners filed I.A.No.828 of 2009 and the said I.A has been dismissed on the ground that they have failed to offer any bank guarantee to the suit amount. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are now ready and willing to furnish bank guarantee to the satisfaction of the suit amount for which there cannot be any objection for the plaintiff. Learned counsel for the respondent-plaintiff fairly submits that the I.A. No.828 of 2009 has been dismissed on the ground that they have failed to furnish the security at the earliest point of time and also they have failed to prove the saleable interest of the executant of the sale deed in question and therefore, there are no bona fides on the part of the petitioners-defendants to come with the plea of furnishing bank guarantee at this stage of the proceedings. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case as well as the nature of the proceedings and the pendency of the main suit itself, I am of the opinion that the objection raised by the respondent-plaintiff, does not appear to be tenable and thereby, it is just and reasonable to permit the petitioners-defendants to furnish bank guarantee to the satisfaction of the suit amount. Accordingly, the civil revision petition is disposed of directing the petitioners to furnish the bank guarantee for the suit amount, to the satisfaction of the court below. On furnishing such bank guarantee, the attachment shall be raised. No order as to the costs. ________________ V.ESWARAIAH, J. 8.10.2010 kpr