IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.BHAVADASAN FRIDAY, THE 9TH APRIL 2010 / 19TH CHAITHRA 1932 WP(C).No. 12715 of 2010(O) --------------------------------------- (OS.NO.169/2009 OF II ADDL.SUB COURT,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM) .................... PETITIONER: ------------------- B.SUKESH, TC.4/1931, PANDIT COLONY, KOWDIAR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADVS. SRI.R.GOPAN, SRI.SHAJIN S.HAMEED. RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ 1. ING VYSYA BANK LTD.,REGD. OFFICE AT ING VYSYA HOUSE,NO.22,M.G.ROAD,BANGALORE-560 001, AND ITS CONSUMER BANKING DIVISION AT IST FLOOR, SHEMA BUILDING,RAVIPURAM,ERNAKULAM-682 016,REP. BY ITS POWER OF ATTORNEY AGENT & ASSOCIATE CONSUMER FINANCE DIVISION,MR.VENUGOPALAN.C.,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. ASSISTANT DIRECTOR, DIRECTORATE OF CENSUS OPERATIONS, KERALA, C.G.O. COMPLEX, POONKULAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE PERSONAL MANAGER, DIRECTORATE OF CENSUS OPERATIONS, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. R1 BY SRI. R.S. KALKURA, S.C, ING VYSYA BANK, R2 & R3 BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI. P.K. RAVIKRISHNAN. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 09/04/2010,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: prv. P.BHAVADASAN, J. ------------------------- W.P (C) No.12715 of 2010 -------------------------- Dated this the 9th April, 2010 J U D G M E N T Aggrieved by Ext.P4, petitioner has come up before this Court through this Writ Petition. 2. First respondent herein filed O.S No.169/09 before the IInd Additional Sub Juge, Thiruvanahtapuram for realisation of the amount due to the Bank. Petitioner is the 1st defendant in O.S.169/2009 and respondents 2 and 3 are the garnishee in the interlocutory application filed by the 1st respondent for attachment. The details relating to his transaction are narrated in the plaint. It is unnecessary to go into the same. 3. In the light of the order that is proposed to be passed, it is not necessary to issue notice to respondents. 4. It is submitted that by Ext.P4 order pensionary benefits due to the petitioner were attached. There is also a direction to the 2nd counter petitioner to furnish security for Rs.1,31,892/0- and to show why she should not furnish such security. W.P (C) No.12715 of 2010 2 5. It is evident that an ad interim order of attachment was passed. Petitioner has pointed out that he has filed Ext.P3 objection to interim order of attachment. The grievance of the petitioner is that due to the pendency of Ext.P3, he is suffering irreparable injury and hardship. Therefore, the petitioner prays that a direction may be issued to the court below to consider and pass orders on Ext.P3. 6. Learned counsel for the respondents pointed out that the petitioner has not appeared before th Court in spite of several directions issued from the Court. 7. However, there will be a direction to the court below to take up the Ext.P3 objection to the interim order of attachment and dispose the same, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate within one month from the date of re- opening of the courts after summer vacation. The writ petition is disposed of, as above. P.BHAVADASAN, JUDGE ma W.P (C) No.12715 of 2010 3 W.P (C) No.12715 of 2010 4