A. SEETARAM REDDY, J.

( 1 ) THESE two revision petitions can be disposed of by a common order as they involve common questions. They are preferred against an order made by the lower court in exercise of its powersunder Rule 5 of Order xxxviii, C. P. C. attaching the gunny bags and the raw jute worth about rs. 11,000/- and odd and bank account in a sum of Rs. 2 lakhs. The order of the lower court in I. A. 449 in O. S. 34 of 1988, dated 15-4-1988 reads as under:"heard the counsel for the petitioner. Issue interim attachment and notice. Posted to 15-6-88. "

( 2 ) THE order passed in I. A. 410 of 1988 in O. S. 32/88, dated 11-4-88 reads as follows :"heard the Counsel for the petitioner, issue interim attachment. Notice, posted to 13-6-88. "

( 3 ) THE arguments advanced on behalf of the petitioner were that the impugned orders of attachment which are made by way of interim order of attachment are unknown to the provisions enacted in Order 38 Rule 5 CPC. What is postulated under Rule 5 is a conditional order as laid down under sub-rule 3) of Rule 5 of the said Order. An order which is said to have been effected under Sub-rule (1) of Rule 5 will be declared void under Sub- rule (4) of Rule 5

Click Here to Read the rest of this document