Point of Law: Elaborating further, Supreme Court observed that the appellants were not seriously prejudiced by such direction.

ORDER :

UJJAL BHUYAN, J.

C.R.P.No.1619 OF 2021

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

2. By filing this petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, petitioners have challenged legality and validity of the order dated 05.8.2021 passed by the III Additional Chief Judge, City Civil Court at Hyderabad in I.A.No.964 of 2020 in O.S.No.298 of 2020.

3. By the aforesaid order dated 05.8.2021, learned Court below has directed the petitioners to furnish security for a sum of Rs.50,00,000-00 on or before 31.8.2021, failing which it has been clarified that attachment of property at Sl.No.3 of the schedule would be ordered.

4. Petitioners are the defendants in the suit filed by the respondent as the plaintiff i.e. O.S.No.298 of 2020. The suit has been filed for a decree directing the defendants (petitioners herein) to jointly and severally pay an amount of Rs.3,00,00,000-00 towards marriage expenses, dowry, incidental expenses, damage to the reputation and goodwill of the family of the plaintiff as well as to award interest on the decretal amount from the date of filing of the suit till the date of realization.

5. Plaintiff (respondent herein) has stated in the plaint that his family and the family of his late brother – Raj Kumar Gupta formed a joint family. After the death of his brother Raj Kumar Gupta on 10.7.2009, he is discharging the role and duties of kartha of the joint family. As the kartha, he had looked after and bore the expenses of the marriage of his later brother’s daughter – Desika Gupta @ Desika Goel.

6. Through family friends a proposal was received for marriage of defendant No.3 who is the son of defendant Nos.1 and 2 with Desika Gupta. Finally the marriage was solemnized on 11.12.2019.

7. According to the plaintiff, defendants insisted that the marriage should be performed at a five-star hotel. Not only that, all the pre-marriage ceremonies should also be performed at five-star hotels. Accordingly one such ceremony was held at ITC Kakatiya hotel, Begumpet, Hyderabad, on 27.7.2019. The marriage was also performed at Taj Deccan, Banjara Hills, Hyderabad. In the meanwhile, on the pressure exerted by the defendants, plaintiff had to pay Rs.3,50,000-00 on 25.9.2020 as the first installment of membership of defendant No.3 in the prestigious Secunderabad club. Defendant No.2 also demanded Rs.25,00,000-00 so that she could offer gifts to the guests during the marriage celebrations. Plaintiff was compelled to pay the said amount as he was under the belief that the same was necessary for the happiness of Desika.

8. During the marriage ceremony, defendants demanded jewelery in the form of silver coins, gold ornaments as well as diamond ornaments which were highly expensive. Plaintiff had to succumb to such demands of the defendants keeping in mind the wellbeing and marital happiness of his niece.

9. Post marriage, the relationship between Desika and defendant No.3 deteriorated to such an extent that cohabitation between them became an impossibility. Though they had gone for holiday, there was no consummation. On the other hand, defendant No.3 caused physical as well as mental harassment of Desika. In addition, further demand of dowry was made. After subjecting Desika and plaintiff to severe harassment, an amount of Rs.50,00,000-00 was extracted from the plaintiff. Plaintiff had to arrange the aforesaid amount in cash by borrowing from private sources at very high interest rate. Other demands were raised as well including gift of a car. It is in such circumstances that the suit was filed. It has been mentioned that defendant No.3 holds a Canadian passport and it is apprehended that if he faces a difficult situation he may abscond from the jurisdiction of the trial Court.

10. Defendants have filed a common written statement denying the above allegations. It is stated that the allegations made are false and baseless. On the contrary, it was the plaintiff and his family members who had played fraud on the defendants, whereby they got