1. Animadverting upon the Judgment and Decree dated 20.6.2006 passed in O.S. No.9 of 2004 by the District Court at Nagapattinam, this Appeal is focused.

2. The parties, for the sake of convenience, are referred to hereunder according to their litigative status and ranking before the Trial Court.

3. Narratively but precisely, broadly but briefly, the germane facts absolutely necessary for the disposal of this Appeal would run thus:

The Plaintiff being a Company registered under the Companies Act, tiled the Suit seeking the following reliefs:

“(a) To direct, the Defendants 1 to 5 to pay the Suit amount as claimed above on a charge of the properties offered as security by way of attachment before judgment for which a separate Application is filed and if the properties for which attachment is sought for is not sufficient to pay the amount personally and out of the other assets which are available in the hands of Defendants 1 to 5 ?

(b) To direct the Defendants 1 to 5 to pay the costs of this Suits.” (extracted as such)

4. The gist and kernel, the pith and marrow of the averments as found exemplified in the Plaint would run thus:

The First Defendant/Ramasamy is the Husband of D