1921 (9) TMI 1

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... of Dharwar in applications by the plaintiff for attachment before judgment against the three defendants. The appellants are the first defendant and the second defendant. 2. The first point taken was that as an order has been made under Section 10 of the Civil Procedure Code staying the suit owing to the pendency of another suit between the same parties in the Court at Bellary, theref .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... self within the terms of the rule; and it is not I sufficient that there are merely vague allegations that the defendant is about to remove the whole or any part of his property from the local limits of the jurisdiction of the Court, this case it is alleged against the first defendant that he was bout to recover the dues of his shop as soon as possible and to remove the articles in the shop. It is .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ey were substantial merchants, and were not about to dispose of their property with intent to obstruct or delay the execution of any decree that the plaintiff might obtain against them, while there was no evidence produced by the plaintiff to support the allegations which he made in March 1920, so that the original order ought to have been discharged instead of the attachment being confirmed. The .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X