ORDER

Challenging the impugned order of attachment passed in E.P.No. 700 of 2025 in LAOP No.672 of 2004 by the learned VI Assistant Judge, City Civil Court, Chennai, the Revision Petitioner/Judgment Debtor preferred this Civil Revision Petition.

2.Considering the relief claimed challenging the order of attachment passed by the Executing Court, notice to the respondents is dispensed with.

3.Before the Executing Court, the respondent, as a decree holder, had filed an application to claim the award amount. When the amount was not paid, the Executing Court has ordered for attachment. Aggrieved over that, the revision petitioner/judgment debtor preferred this Civil Revision Petition. 4.The learned counsel for revision petitioner argues that the respondent/decree holder is not a real owner of the property. So, he is not entitled to claim the award amount and by giving wrong particulars, he attempted to get the award amount. Hence, he raised objections and submitted that still he is having valid defence to prove his case. Therefore, he has sought to set aside the attachment order passed by the Execut