IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.M.JOSEPH & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.L.JOSEPH FRANCIS THURSDAY, THE 7TH APRIL 2011 / 17TH CHAITHRA 1933 OP (FC).No. 1302 of 2011(P) --------------------------- OP.20/2011 of FAMILY COURT, MALAPPURAM .................... (S): PETITIONERS ------------------------------- 1. FATHIMATH SUHRA, D/O.KOLLANCHERI ABDUL JALEEL, KOLLANCHERI HOUSE, THIRURANGADI, CHEMMAD, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. 2. AMAN-MINOR, REP. BY MOTHER-GUARDIAN, FIRST PETITIONER. BY ADV. SRI.BABU S. NAIR SRI.K.RAKESH RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. BABU @ MUHAMMED, S/O.KARUVANNIL MAITHI, KARUVANNIL HOUSE, VENGARA, KUZHIPURAM, IRINGALLUR P.O., MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN-676304. 2. KARUVANNIL MAITHI, S/O.MUHAMMED, KARUVANNIL HOUSE, VENGARA, KUZHIPURAM, IRINGALLUR P.O., MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN-676304. 3. PATHUMMA, W/O.KARUVANNIL MAITHI, KARUVANNIL HOUSE, VENGARA, KUZHIPURAM, IRINGALLUR P.O., MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN-676304. ADV.SRI.P.B.KRISHNAN. THIS OP (FAMILY COURT) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 07/04/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K.M.JOSEPH & M.L.JOSEPH FRANCIS, JJ. ----------------------------------------------- O.P.(F.C.) No.1302 of 2011 ----------------------------------------------- Dated 7th April, 2011. J U D G M E N T Joseph, J. This Original Petition is filed by the petitioners in O.P.No.20/2011 before the Family Court, Malappuram, being aggrieved by Ext.P4 order. The total claim in the said Original Petition is for an amount of Rs.35,33,400/-. The petitioners filed an application for attachment before judgment against the respondents in this case and the same was allowed by the Family Court and A schedule bill was attached. It is a bill payable to the first respondent from the P.W.D. authorities, for the works undertaken by him. Thereupon, the first respondent filed objection and he offered Schedule B, which is an immovable property, having an extent of 43 cents. The Family Court (Principal District Judge-in-charge), by the impugned order, acceded to the request of the first respondent and lifted the attachment of A schedule bill and instead, ordered attachment of B schedule property. O.P.(F.C.) 1302/11 2 2. The complaint of the petitioners, no doubt, is that having regard to the quantum of monetary claims raised, the Family Court has acted illegally in lifting the attachment over A schedule. Essentially, no reasons are stated in support of the order, it is submitted. It is pointed out that B schedule property is riddled with liabilities and there will be no sufficient security to protect the interests of the decree holder in payment of the decree. 3. Learned counsel for the respondents would submit that the first respondent had taken up a public work and if the payments under A schedule bill are withheld, both the first respondent and the public will be jeopardized. After some debate at the Bar, learned counsel for the parties have agreed that a half-way house approach can be adopted. It is submitted by the counsel that the parties are agreeable to the attachment over A schedule, to the tune of Rs.20,00,000/- being retained, i.e., from a total amount of Rs.48,00,000/-, which according to the first respondent is the amount payable to the first O.P.(F.C.) 1302/11 3 respondent, Rs.20,00,000/- can be ordered to be deposited to the credit of O.P.20/2011 before the Family Court, Malappuram and the attachment in respect of the balance amount may be lifted. It is further agreed by the respondents that the first respondent will furnish additional security, apart from B schedule property. It is also agreed that the Family Court may conduct an enquiry and the property may be directed to be given as security, in excess of Rs.20,00,000/- which will come from A schedule, so that the interests of the decree holder may be safeguarded. In such circumstances, we order as follows :- (i) Attachment of B schedule property will continue. (ii) As far as A schedule is concerned, Rs.20,00,000/- from out of the total amount due to the first respondent shall be paid to the credit of O.P.No.20/2011 before the Family Court, Malappuram. The attachment in respect of the balance amount in A schedule will stand lifted. O.P.(F.C.) 1302/11 4 (iii) We record the submission of the first respondent that the first respondent will furnish additional security. (iv) The Family Court will conduct an enquiry and ascertain whether the value of the property, which is offered as security, is sufficient to cover the entire decretal amount, in which case, it will be open to the first respondent to withdraw the amount of Rs.20,00,000/-. (v) We further make it clear that nothing contained in this judgment will be understood as a direction to the P.W.D. authorities to make the payment of the bill, overlooking the priority or against law. (vi) The mere fact that we have upheld the order of attachment over B schedule, should not by itself persuade the Family Court to come to the conclusion, when it conducts the enquiry, that we have given a seal of approval to B schedule property being sufficient security. O.P.(F.C.) 1302/11 5 (vii) The Family Court, Malappuram will conduct the enquiry with regard to the sufficiency of security already furnished and to be furnished, without any delay. The O.P.(F.C.) is disposed of as above. Sd/- K.M.JOSEPH, JUDGE. Sd/- M.L.JOSEPH FRANCIS, JUDGE. tgs