M. VENUGOPAL, J.

1. The Appellants/Respondents/Defendants have preferred the instant Original Side Appeal [As 'Aggrieved Persons'] as against the order dated 18.01.2018 in Application No. 2634 of 2017 in C.S. No. 293 of 2017 passed by the Learned Single Judge. Earlier, the Learned Single Judge while passing the impugned Order in Application No. 2364 of 2017 in C.S. No. 293 of 2017 on 18.01.2018 at Paragraph Nos. 15 to 18 had observed the following and resultantly allowed the Application by directing the Appellants/Respondents/Defendants to furnish Security to the value of suit claim of Rs. 1,20,85,500/- on or before 15.02.2018, failing which, ordered 'Attachment Before Judgment' of the immovable property comprised in Plot No. 37, Old No. 4 New Door No. 7, Rama Rao Road, Mylapore, Chennai - 4 and the movables in the schedule property at No. 83, Venkatarangam Pillai Street, Triplicane, Chennai-5 without further delay.

"15. The defendants have taken a very hostile stand in the entire proceedings. They have freely used the word 'illegal' to any order passed by the Court. They have claimed that they are in lawful possession. However, it is only just and necessary that they come forward to furnish security to the value of the suit claim. This is all the more important, because the defendants have been attempting to protract the proceedings. They have filed applications under Section 10 of the CPC, though, there is no relevance in issues between the suit in the City Civil Court, Chennai and in the present suit. As a matter of fact, the proceedings in the City Civil Court, Chennai had also gone adversely against the defendants herein.

16. It is also seen that the Plaintiff being a Trust had also approached this Court, seeking to demolish the superstructure and rebuild the superstructure. This Court had an occasion to examine the legality of such proposal and also granted permission in A. No. 5088 of 2013 in C.S. No. 439 of 1977. Consequently, the Plaintiff has every right to call upon the defendants to vacate and hand over vacant possession.

17. The defendants are in continuous occupation. It is natural that they will have to pay the damages/rent to the Plaintiff. The suit is based on such claim. In view of the stand taken by the tenants, it is only justifiable that the Plaintiff apprehends that the defendant would vacate and evade any further judicial process. Under these circumstances, particularly when there is a reasonable apprehension that the defendants might vacate the premises to the disadvantage of the plaintiff and also remove the movables, the defendants have to be called upon to furnish security to the value of the suit claim.

18. Accordingly, A. No. 2364 of 2017 is allowed, as prayed for. A. Nos. 3417 and 3418 are dismissed. No costs. The Respondents/Defendants are directed to furnish security to the value of the suit claim of Rs. 1,20,85,500/- (Rupees One Crore Twenty Lakhs Eighty five thousand and five hundred only) on or before 15.02.2018, failing which, there shall be an order of attachment before judgment to attach the immovable property, comprised in Plot No. 37, Old Door No. 4, New Door No. 7, Rama Rao Road, Mylapore, Chennai-4 and the movables in the Schedule Property at No. 83, Venkatrangam Pillai Street, Triplicane, Chennai-5, without any further reference."

The Appellants Pleas:

2. The Learned Senior Counsel for the Appellants submits that the Impugned Order of the Learned Single Judge in Application No. 2364 of 2017 in C.S. No. 293 of 2017 dated 18.01.2018 in allowing the Application filed by the Respondent/Plaintiff to furnish security, failing which directing the Attachment in question is against Law and the same payable to be set aside.

3. The Learned Senior Counsel for the Appellants contends that the amount of damages determined by the Respondent/Plaintiff is only tentative in nature and the same is