1. This writ petition is directed against the order dated 25.3.2011 in O.S.No.5986/2010 on the file of the 30th Additional City Civil Judge, Bangalore city, whereby the application filed by the petitioner under Order 38 Rule 5 of the CPC for an order of attachment before judgment attaching the suit schedule property has been dismissed.

2. The petitioner is the plaintiff in the suit and the respondent is the defendant. For the purpose of convenience, the parties are referred to by their respective ranking before the trial Court. The plaintiff filed the above suit against the defendant for recovery of a sum of Rs.95,20,000/-together with future interest at 18% per annum from the date of the suit till the date of realisation. In the suit, the plaintiff has contended that the defendant being the absolute owner of the suit schedule property had executed an agreement of sale dated 25.06.2007 agreeing to sell the said property in his favour for a sale consideration of Rs.75 lakhs and as on the date of the execution of the sale agreement, he has paid a sum of Rs.47,70,000/-by way of cash and Rs.50,000/-by way of cheque and another cheque for Rs.1,80,000/-. Thus, in all, the plaintiff has paid Rs.50 lakhs to the defendant and the same has been duly acknowledged by the defendant. He has paid another sum of Rs.3 lakhs by way of cash on 26.9.2007. As part of the contract, the plaintiff was further required to pay loan amount of Rs.12 lakhs borrow by the defendant from the Rajajinagar Co-operative Bank Limited, Rajajinagar. In pursuance to the same, the plaintiff has discharged the loan of the defendant taken from Rajajinagar Co-operative Bank Limited amounting to Rs.12 lakhs. Thus, in all, the plaintiff has paid a sum of Rs.65 lakhs, out of which, Rs.53 lakhs as advance sale consideration and Rs.12 lakhs by clearing the loan amount of the defendant. It is further contended that the plaintiff was ready and willing to pay the balance of the sale consideration. however, the defendant showed her dissent towards performance of her part of the contract and failed to execute and register the sale deed in favour of the plaintiff by receiving the balance of the sale consideration. On 21.7.2008, the defendant approached the plaintiff and expressed her unwillingness and inability to execute the sale deed in favour of the plaintiff. However, the defendant assured to return the advance sale consideration received along with the liquidated damages. On 21.7.2008, the defendant got executed a sale deed in favour of the plaintiff in respect of a flat bearing No.404 constructed on the property bearing No.343/2, new katha Nos.397 and 398 situated at Shanthi Layout, Kaudenahalli village, K.R. Puram Hobli, Bangalore East Taluk. The defendant for the reasons best known to her, did not come forward to execute the sale deed or pay back the advance payment paid by him towards the purchase of the suit schedule property. However, she has executed an agreement on 18.8.2008 wherein she has admitted to pay Rs.53 lakhs, which was taken as advance and Rs.17 lakhs as liquidated damages which includes a sum of Rs.12 lakhs paid by the plaintiff to clear the loan amount of the defendant and another sum of Rs.5 lakhs as agreed by the agreement dated 25.6.2007. Thus, in all, she has agreed to pay Rs.70 lakhs in favour of the plaintiff. It was further agreed under the said agreement that the defendant shall hand over the physical possession of the flat referred to above failing which defendant shall pay a sum of Rs.10,000/-as monthly rental charges till the delivery of handing over of possession of the said flat. But the defendant did not pay the said amount nor fulfilled the obligations created under the agreement dated 25.6.2007. On verification, the plaintiff found that the said flat was not yet completed and the property on which flats were constructed is under litigation and therefore, the plaintiff did not opt to have the said flat. Hence, the plaintiff restri