The High Court, in exercise of its writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, cannot direct the effacement of an attachment recorded by a registering authority pursuant to a civil court order; the appropriate remedy lies in approaching the civil court itself.

JUDGMENT

Dated this the 2^nd day of June, 2026 This writ petition is filed by the petitioner seeking the following reliefs:

"A. Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order of directing 1^st respondent to consider and pass orders on Ext.P10 representation by positively removing the order of attachment reflecting in Ext.P3 within a time frame fixed by this Honorable court.

B. To declare that there is no subsisting attachment over the property measuring 25.53 Ares comprised in survey No.267/1 (84 Sq.mtr), 248/1A (19.83 Ares) & 248/2 (4.86 Ares) of Pallipuram Village, Cherthala Taluk, Alappuzha covered by Document No.1766/2016 of Panavally SRO. C. Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction directing the 1^st respondent to record the order of dismissal and lifting of attachment in encumbrance certificate.”

2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader appearing for respondents 1 to 3. There is no representation for the 4^th respondent.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that since the suit has been dismissed for default and thereafter restored, the attachment passed by the civil court initially will not be revived and therefore, the relevant entry in Ext.P3 is illegal and is liable to be effaced.

4. Per contra, the learned Government Pleader submitted that as per the decision of the Full Bench of this Court in Fathima v. Canara Bank, Palakkad [2025 KHC OnLine 521], in cases of attachment recorded on the basis of the orders passed by the civil court, the remedy of the petitioner is to approach the civil court and this Court cannot invoke Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

5. On an anxious consideration of the rival submissions and the materials on record, I am of the view that there is some merit in the submissions made by the learned Government Pleader. In the decision in Fathima (supra), the Full Bench of this Court has categorically held that the remedy of the petitioner to get the attachment made on the orders of the civil court, lifted is by moving the civil court itself and this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India cannot direct effacement of such attachment.

In such circumstances, with liberty to the petitioner to approach the civil court seeking lifting of attachment, this writ petition is dismissed.