O R D E R

2. The appellant has laid challenge to an order dated 29.06.2017 passed by the Madras High Court, Madurai Bench, whereby the appeal filed by respondent No.1 has been allowed and the attachment order for the suit property has been set aside.

4. The aforesaid order came to be challenged by respondent No.1 –

13:00:37 IST Reasobn:een passed. The High Court has set aside the order of attachment, inter alia, observing that the d octrine of lis pendens is not applicable as the money suit does not specifically concern the right in the subject property. The High Court has further observed that fraudulent transfer in terms of Section 53 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882 would necessarily require multiple creditors, which involves the case in hand. Further, the attachment was also held to be invalid under Section 64 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 .

6. It is not in dispute that the above-stated stay is still in operation. It seems that the proceedings are still pending either before the trial court or some other forum. Counsel for t