B.L. YADAV, J.

1. THIS is a defendant's appeal against the order dated 6-8-1988 passed under Order 38 Rule 5 (3) of the Code of Civil Procedure, (for short the Code), by the Civil Judge, Lalitpur, directing the defendant not to transfer his property till he appears on 1-11-88 and shows cause as to why not the application of the plaintiff respondent for attachment before judgment could be allowed.

2. SRI V. S. Singh, learned counsel for the appellant urged that the impugned order was beyond the scope of Order 38 Rule 5 (3) of the Code and principles of natural justice were violated. Reliance was placed on Vishwanath v. Pirabhunath Misir, 1982 ACJ 119.

Before coming to the point it is convenient to refer to the factual metrix a bit in detail. The plaintiff respondents have filed a suit for recovery of a sum of Rs. 9,53,000/- from the defendant appellant with pendente lite and future interest on 22-2-84 in the court of the Civil Judge, Lalitpur. The plaint was filed with insufficient stamp and an application was filed to grant some more time to enable the plaintiff to make good the deficiency. Till 30-5-88 from time to time opportunity was given to the plaintiffs to make good t