Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : SRI.V.G.ARUN, MT.V.JAYA RAGI, SMT.INDULEKHA JOSEPH, SRI.NEERAJ NARAYAN
For the Respondent: SRI.M.R.RAJESH, SMT.E.S.SANDHYA

Based on the provided legal document, the key points regarding the legal issues and interpretation of the relevant provisions are as follows:

1. The order of deposit of Rs. 70,00,000/- as directed by the court disqualifies the appellant from claiming an order of attachment. Consequently, the absence of a specific direction under Order XXXVIII Rule 5(1) did not prejudice the appellant in this case (!) .

2. Orders under Order XXXVIII Rules 2, 3, and 6 are appealable, but orders under Rule 5 are not directly appealable unless they are under Rule 6 or involve a conditional attachment order passed under Rule 5(3) (!) (!) .

3. An order passed under Rule 5(1) that results in a notice to the defendant, without a conditional attachment order, does not constitute an appealable order under the relevant appellate provisions. The legal interpretation is that such an order is not within the scope of Rule 6(2) unless a conditional attachment order has been issued or withdrawn (!) (!) .

4. The legal interpretation emphasizes that the power to issue an order of attachment before judgment is a substantive jurisdictional step that requires strict adherence to procedural conditions, including the issuance of a notice and, if applicable, a conditional attachment order under Rule 5(3). Failure to comply with these procedural requirements renders the order void or non-appealable (!) (!) .

5. The statutory provisions and their historical evolution show that the law intends a careful and circumspect approach to attachment orders, with a clear distinction between notices, directions, and conditional attachments. The language of the rules should be interpreted in their plain, literal sense, respecting the legislative intent and the structure of the law (!) (!) (!) .

6. The power of the court to pass an order of attachment or to withdraw such an order is contingent upon the existence of a valid attachment order, which must be preceded by proper procedural steps. The inclusion of the phrase "or make such other order as it thinks fit" in Rule 6(2) broadens the court's discretion but only within the context of an existing attachment order, not in the absence thereof (!) (!) .

7. The right of appeal is a creature of statute, and only those orders explicitly made appealable by law can be challenged on appeal. Orders not falling within the specific categories enumerated in the law are not subject to appeal, reinforcing the importance of legislative clarity in conferring appellate jurisdiction (!) (!) .

8. The interpretation of the words "and" and "or" in statutory provisions must adhere to their plain meaning unless the legislative intent clearly indicates otherwise. The use of "and" in Rule 6(2) should be understood as conjunctive, requiring both cause/furnishing security and the existence of an attachment for the court's power to act (!) (!) .

9. External aids such as the usage and practice at the time of enactment support the interpretation that orders under Rule 6(2) are only applicable where an attachment order has been made or withdrawn, not in cases where the application was dismissed without a conditional attachment order (!) (!) .

10. The consistent judicial interpretation over time, the doctrine of stare decisis, and the textual clarity of the law support the view that orders under Rule 5 that do not involve a conditional attachment are not appealable under Rule 6(2). The law's structure and language aim to prevent unwarranted appeals and ensure procedural correctness (!) (!) .

In summary, the legal framework and judicial interpretation affirm that only orders involving a conditional attachment or withdrawal thereof are appealable under the relevant provisions. Orders merely directing notices or requiring the defendant to show cause, without a formal attachment order, do not fall within the scope of appealable orders under the law.