( 1 ) THIS Revision is filed against the order passed in LA. No. 752 of 1993 in O. S. No. 132 of 1993 on the file of HI Additional Judge, City Civil Court, secunderabad. The above I. A. , was filed under Order 38 Rule 5 CPC for an order of attachment before Judgment against the immovable properties belonging to the respondents, situated at Tandur as mentioned in the petition Schedules I and II. The lower Court after considering the rival contentions, allowed the petition granting open attachment in respect of Item-I (b) and Items 2 (i) to (iii) of the petition schedule property. Against the said order, the defendants filed this revision.

( 2 ) THE learned Counsel appearing for the revision petitioners submitted that there is no truth in the allegation that the first defendant is disposing of the petition schedule lands to defeat the decree; the respondent-plaintiff did not reveal the source of information that first defendant is disposing of the property; the affidavit in support of the petition is vague. It is mentioned that one Mr. Ravikanth, who is the resident of Vidyanagar, Hyderabad has given information that the first petitioner is disposing of the property