R. Narayana Pisharadi, J.—Attachment before judgment is a drastic action in law. Time and again this Court has reminded the lower courts that the power under Order 38 Rule 5 of the Code of Civil Procedure shall be exercised only with circumspection. But, this is a case in which the court below has exercised such power mechanically.

2. The appellant is the first defendant in the suit filed by the first respondent firm and its partners in the Sub Court, Ernakulam. The appellant is a company and it challenges the order passed against it by that court for attachment before judgment of the property held by it as a lessee.

3. The suit is filed by the first respondent firm and its partners as indigent persons for recovery of an amount of Rs.4,11,18,656/- from the appellant company and its directors. The first respondent firm has also claimed an amount of Rs.13,79,60,977/- as damages from the appellant company. The sum and substance of the case set out in the suit by the first respondent firm is that it was a dealer of Skoda cars manufactured by the appellant company and that it incurred huge loss on account of various acts done by the appellant company in violation of the dealers