{"id":346343,"date":"2025-04-24T09:00:42","date_gmt":"2025-04-24T03:30:42","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=346343"},"modified":"2025-05-02T17:18:48","modified_gmt":"2025-05-02T11:48:48","slug":"madras-hc-lifts-attachment-sivaji-ganesan-property-arbitral-award","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/04\/24\/madras-hc-lifts-attachment-sivaji-ganesan-property-arbitral-award\/","title":{"rendered":"Madras HC clears attachment on late actor Sivaji Ganesan\u2019s property amid arbitral award execution against grandson"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n

Madras High Court:<\/span> In an application filed under Order 21 Rule 58<\/a> Code of Civil Procedure, 1908<\/a>, (‘CPC’) seeking to raise the order of attachment granted by this Court on 10-02-2025, Abdul Quddhose, J. held that the applicant was undoubtedly the absolute owner of the attached property, and that respondents 2 to 5\/judgment debtors had no right, title, or interest in it. Further, the Court said that when the documentary evidence placed on record clearly revealed that the applicant was the owner of the property that had been wrongfully ordered to be attached by the Court, there was no necessity to direct the parties to trial.<\/p>\n

Background<\/h3>\n

The property in question, belonging to the late actor Sivaji Ganesan, had been attached by the Court in March 2023 in a plea seeking execution of an arbitral award against his grandson, Dushyanth Ramkumar (respondent 3), and their production company, Eshan Productions.<\/p>\n

The applicant and respondent 5 were sons of Sivaji Ganesan. Respondents 3 and 4 were the grandson and granddaughter of Sivaji Ganesan, respectively. Respondents 2 to 5 were the judgment debtors, and respondent 1 was the decree holder.<\/p>\n

The applicant contended that he was the owner of the property and, according to him, his property had been wrongly attached through the Court’s order dated 10-02-2025. In support of his contention, the applicant relied upon certain documents through which he traced his title over the property that had been ordered to be attached by the Court. The applicant asserted that he alone was the owner of the property that had been ordered to be attached, and the judgment debtors had no right or interest in the same.<\/p>\n

Analysis and Decision<\/h3>\n

The Court noted that Order 21, Rule 58<\/a> of the CPC<\/a> dealt with the adjudication of claims or objections raised to the attachment of property in execution of a decree. It outlined the process for the Executing Court to determine whether the attached property was liable to attachment. Essentially, it provided a mechanism for third parties to challenge the attachment of property in which they claimed ownership or interest. Therefore, any person who claimed an interest in the attached property or objected to its attachment on the ground that the property was owned by him or her could file an application under Order 21, Rule 58<\/a> CPC<\/a>, and the Executing Court was required to investigate the claim or objection in a summary manner. The wording of Order 21, Rule 58<\/a> CPC<\/a> also did not stipulate that necessarily only after trial could the application be adjudicated by the Executing Court.<\/p>\n

The Court noted that earlier, the applicant had sought Letters of Administration for the Will dated 23-06-1999, executed by actor Sivaji Ganesan (father). The petition filed before this Court seeking Letters of Administration was converted into a Testamentary Original Suit, in view of the objections raised by the applicant’s sisters. However, through a Mediator, all the legal heirs of the deceased actor Sivaji Ganesan arrived at an amicable settlement. In the presence of the Mediator, a Joint Memorandum of Compromise was entered between the legal heirs, by which it was agreed that the subject property was absolutely owned by the applicant.<\/p>\n

Under the said Memorandum of Compromise the respondent 5 was permitted to stay in the subject property in accordance with the wishes of the late actor Sivaji Ganesan. The Memorandum also stipulated that a sibling could, out of love and affection, release his or her share absolutely in favour of another sibling. The release deed dated 15-07-2024, registered in favour of the applicant, did not create any suspicion in the mind of the Court regarding its genuineness, particularly since the deed was executed solely to implement the Memorandum of Compromise. Pursuant to the Memorandum of Compromise, which was arrived at in the presence of the Mediator, the release deed was executed in favour of the applicant, through which the applicant became the absolute owner of the attached property. The sisters of the applicant had received monetary consideration for releasing their respective shares in the property. Similarly, the respondent 5 \/judgment debtor was permitted to reside in the attached property for the duration of his lifetime. Therefore, it was clear that, even prior to the filing of the execution petition on 24-07-2024, the release deed had already been executed in favour of the applicant.<\/p>\n

The Court stated that the mode of adjudication in an application under Order 21, Rule 58<\/a> CPC<\/a> was akin to the mode of adjudication adopted in a summary suit under Order 37 CPC or in the rejection of a plaint under Order 7, Rule 11<\/a> CPC<\/a>. Only in cases where triable issues were involved did the Court direct the parties to proceed to trial. In the present case, when the documentary evidence placed on record before the Court clearly revealed that the applicant was the owner of the property that had been wrongfully ordered to be attached by the Court, there was no necessity to direct the parties to trial.<\/p>\n

The Court highlighted that if the intention of the legislature had been to require the recording of oral evidence for adjudicating every application filed under Order 21, Rule 58<\/a> CPC<\/a>, such a requirement would have been explicitly stipulated within the provision itself. Therefore, merely because an order passed by the Executing Court under Order 21, Rule 58<\/a> CPC<\/a> also amounted to a decree and was appealable, it did not follow that the Executing Court was mandated to adjudicate the application only after trial. As in the case of a leave to defend application in a summary suit, or a rejection of a plaint under Order 7, Rule 11<\/a> CPC<\/a>, so too in the present application under Order 21, Rule 58<\/a> CPC<\/a>, if the Court found, without any doubt, that the applicant was entitled to a decree as prayed for, based on the documentary evidence on record, there was no need to direct the parties to go for trial, since the proceedings were summary in nature.<\/p>\n

The Court concluded that it was clear the applicant was undoubtedly the absolute owner of the attached property, and that respondents 2 to 5\/judgment debtors had no right, title, or interest in it. Therefore, the application necessarily had to be allowed as prayed for. Accordingly, the application was allowed as prayed for by raising the order of attachment passed by this Court. The applicant was permitted to communicate this order to all the statutory authorities, including the Registration Department, and the said authorities were directed to act accordingly and remove the encumbrance (order of attachment) from their respective records.<\/p>\n

[Ganesan Prabhu v. Dhanabakkiam Enterprises, 2025 SCC OnLine Mad 2379<\/a>, decided on 21-04-2025<\/span>]<\/p>\n\n

Advocates who appeared in this case:<\/p>\n

For Applicant:<\/span> Mr.P.R.Raman, Sr. Counsel<\/p>\n

For Respondent:<\/span> Mr.A.Palaniappan, Mr.G.V.Sridharan<\/p>\n<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

If the intention of the legislature had been to require the recording of oral evidence for adjudicating every application filed under Order 21, Rule 58 CPC, such a requirement would have been explicitly stipulated within the provision itself.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":67512,"featured_media":314802,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[3,10],"tags":[2633,81312,44760,30650,81313,2567,81310,81311,81309,81314],"class_list":["post-346343","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-casebriefs","category-highcourts","tag-arbitral_award","tag-dushyanth-ramkumar","tag-execution-petition","tag-execution-proceedings","tag-full-trial","tag-Madras_High_Court","tag-order-21-rule-58","tag-property-attachment","tag-sivaji-ganesan","tag-sivaji-ganesan-property-attachment"],"yoast_head":"\nMadras High Court Lifts Attachment of Sivaji Ganesan's Property in Arbitral Award Execution Against Grandson | SCC Times<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"Madras High Court cleared attachment of Sivaji Ganesan's property in execution proceedings against his grandson, emphasizing that appealability under Order 21 Rule 58 CPC does not mandate a full trial.\" \/>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/04\/24\/madras-hc-lifts-attachment-sivaji-ganesan-property-arbitral-award\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Madras HC clears attachment on late actor Sivaji Ganesan\u2019s property amid arbitral award execution against grandson\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Madras High Court cleared attachment of Sivaji Ganesan's property in execution proceedings against his grandson, emphasizing that appealability under Order 21 Rule 58 CPC does not mandate a full trial.\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/04\/24\/madras-hc-lifts-attachment-sivaji-ganesan-property-arbitral-award\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"SCC Times\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2025-04-24T03:30:42+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2025-05-02T11:48:48+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Madras-High-Court.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"887\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"591\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Apoorva\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:title\" content=\"Madras HC clears attachment on late actor Sivaji Ganesan\u2019s property amid arbitral award execution against grandson\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Apoorva\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"6 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/04\/24\/madras-hc-lifts-attachment-sivaji-ganesan-property-arbitral-award\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/04\/24\/madras-hc-lifts-attachment-sivaji-ganesan-property-arbitral-award\/\",\"name\":\"Madras High Court Lifts Attachment of Sivaji Ganesan's Property in Arbitral Award Execution Against Grandson | SCC Times\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/04\/24\/madras-hc-lifts-attachment-sivaji-ganesan-property-arbitral-award\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/04\/24\/madras-hc-lifts-attachment-sivaji-ganesan-property-arbitral-award\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Madras-High-Court.webp\",\"datePublished\":\"2025-04-24T03:30:42+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2025-05-02T11:48:48+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/288d814d0864b57168e08daa1940a1c9\"},\"description\":\"Madras High Court cleared attachment of Sivaji Ganesan's property in execution proceedings against his grandson, emphasizing that appealability under Order 21 Rule 58 CPC does not mandate a full trial.\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/04\/24\/madras-hc-lifts-attachment-sivaji-ganesan-property-arbitral-award\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/04\/24\/madras-hc-lifts-attachment-sivaji-ganesan-property-arbitral-award\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/04\/24\/madras-hc-lifts-attachment-sivaji-ganesan-property-arbitral-award\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Madras-High-Court.webp\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Madras-High-Court.webp\",\"width\":887,\"height\":591,\"caption\":\"Madras High Court\"},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/04\/24\/madras-hc-lifts-attachment-sivaji-ganesan-property-arbitral-award\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Madras HC clears attachment on late actor Sivaji Ganesan\u2019s property amid arbitral award execution against grandson\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\",\"name\":\"SCC Times\",\"description\":\"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/288d814d0864b57168e08daa1940a1c9\",\"name\":\"Apoorva\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/549edb3ed2c7046a0c504583cf71db32c50251c1260a6331b2cc2973e80b0e91?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/549edb3ed2c7046a0c504583cf71db32c50251c1260a6331b2cc2973e80b0e91?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Apoorva\"},\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/scc-editor\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Madras High Court Lifts Attachment of Sivaji Ganesan's Property in Arbitral Award Execution Against Grandson | SCC Times","description":"Madras High Court cleared attachment of Sivaji Ganesan's property in execution proceedings against his grandson, emphasizing that appealability under Order 21 Rule 58 CPC does not mandate a full trial.","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/04\/24\/madras-hc-lifts-attachment-sivaji-ganesan-property-arbitral-award\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Madras HC clears attachment on late actor Sivaji Ganesan\u2019s property amid arbitral award execution against grandson","og_description":"Madras High Court cleared attachment of Sivaji Ganesan's property in execution proceedings against his grandson, emphasizing that appealability under Order 21 Rule 58 CPC does not mandate a full trial.","og_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/04\/24\/madras-hc-lifts-attachment-sivaji-ganesan-property-arbitral-award\/","og_site_name":"SCC Times","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/","article_published_time":"2025-04-24T03:30:42+00:00","article_modified_time":"2025-05-02T11:48:48+00:00","og_image":[{"width":887,"height":591,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Madras-High-Court.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Apoorva","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_title":"Madras HC clears attachment on late actor Sivaji Ganesan\u2019s property amid arbitral award execution against grandson","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Apoorva","Est. reading time":"6 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/04\/24\/madras-hc-lifts-attachment-sivaji-ganesan-property-arbitral-award\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/04\/24\/madras-hc-lifts-attachment-sivaji-ganesan-property-arbitral-award\/","name":"Madras High Court Lifts Attachment of Sivaji Ganesan's Property in Arbitral Award Execution Against Grandson | SCC Times","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/04\/24\/madras-hc-lifts-attachment-sivaji-ganesan-property-arbitral-award\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/04\/24\/madras-hc-lifts-attachment-sivaji-ganesan-property-arbitral-award\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Madras-High-Court.webp","datePublished":"2025-04-24T03:30:42+00:00","dateModified":"2025-05-02T11:48:48+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/288d814d0864b57168e08daa1940a1c9"},"description":"Madras High Court cleared attachment of Sivaji Ganesan's property in execution proceedings against his grandson, emphasizing that appealability under Order 21 Rule 58 CPC does not mandate a full trial.","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/04\/24\/madras-hc-lifts-attachment-sivaji-ganesan-property-arbitral-award\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/04\/24\/madras-hc-lifts-attachment-sivaji-ganesan-property-arbitral-award\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/04\/24\/madras-hc-lifts-attachment-sivaji-ganesan-property-arbitral-award\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Madras-High-Court.webp","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Madras-High-Court.webp","width":887,"height":591,"caption":"Madras High Court"},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/04\/24\/madras-hc-lifts-attachment-sivaji-ganesan-property-arbitral-award\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Madras HC clears attachment on late actor Sivaji Ganesan\u2019s property amid arbitral award execution against grandson"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/","name":"SCC Times","description":"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/288d814d0864b57168e08daa1940a1c9","name":"Apoorva","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/549edb3ed2c7046a0c504583cf71db32c50251c1260a6331b2cc2973e80b0e91?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/549edb3ed2c7046a0c504583cf71db32c50251c1260a6331b2cc2973e80b0e91?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Apoorva"},"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/scc-editor\/"}]}},"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Madras-High-Court.webp","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":335737,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/11\/22\/bikaner-house-attached-to-enforce-payment-under-an-arbitral-award\/","url_meta":{"origin":346343,"position":0},"title":"Patiala House Court orders attachment of Bikaner House to enforce payment under an arbitral award","author":"Editor","date":"November 22, 2024","format":false,"excerpt":"The Nagar Palika of the State of Rajasthan failed to comply with court order to file an affidavit of assets despite being given multiple opportunities and failed to pay the petitioner in accordance with the arbitral award.","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Bikaner House attached","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/11\/Bikaner-House-attached.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/11\/Bikaner-House-attached.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/11\/Bikaner-House-attached.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/11\/Bikaner-House-attached.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":336344,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/11\/30\/patiala-house-court-orders-stay-on-attachment-of-bikaner-house\/","url_meta":{"origin":346343,"position":1},"title":"Delhi Court orders conditional stay on attachment of Bikaner House; Directs payment of decretal amount in terms of Arbitral Award","author":"Editor","date":"November 30, 2024","format":false,"excerpt":"The Court had ordered the attachment of the Bikaner House to enforce payment since neither did the Nagar Palika of the State of Rajasthan comply with the court order to file an affidavit of assets nor did it pay the petitioner per the arbitral award.","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Bikaner House attachment stayed","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/11\/Bikaner-House-attachment-stayed.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/11\/Bikaner-House-attachment-stayed.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/11\/Bikaner-House-attachment-stayed.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/11\/Bikaner-House-attachment-stayed.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":255322,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/10\/08\/when-can-court-invoke-its-power-to-effect-an-attachment-under-or-38-r-5-of-civil-procedure-code\/","url_meta":{"origin":346343,"position":2},"title":"When can Court invoke its Power to effect an attachment under Or. 38 R. 5 of Civil Procedure Code? Madras HC decides","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"October 8, 2021","format":false,"excerpt":"Madras High Court: G. Jayachandran, J., with the lens of this decision addressed the Power under Order XXXVIII, Rule 5 of the Civil Procedure Code. In the present matter, the plaintiff a Non-banking Finance Company (NBFC) and the First defendant a Micro Level Finance Company were the parties, and the\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]},{"id":256794,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/11\/06\/attachment-before-judgment-drastic-and-extraordinary-faculty-envisioned-to-succour-justice-dispensation\/","url_meta":{"origin":346343,"position":3},"title":"Attachment Before Judgment: Drastic and Extraordinary Faculty, Envisioned to Succour Justice Dispensation","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"November 6, 2021","format":false,"excerpt":"by Abhishek Goyal\u2020","rel":"","context":"In "OP. ED."","block_context":{"text":"OP. ED.","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/op-ed\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/11\/MicrosoftTeams-image-116.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/11\/MicrosoftTeams-image-116.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/11\/MicrosoftTeams-image-116.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/11\/MicrosoftTeams-image-116.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/11\/MicrosoftTeams-image-116.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":324891,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/06\/21\/executing-court-must-ascertain-stamp-duty-payment-issue-before-enforcement-of-arbitral-award-mp-high-court-scc-times\/","url_meta":{"origin":346343,"position":4},"title":"Executing Court must ascertain stamp duty payment issue before enforcement of Arbitral Award: MP High Court","author":"Ritu","date":"June 21, 2024","format":false,"excerpt":"The Court held that unilateral appointment of the Arbitrator without the petitioner's consent could render the award void under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Madhya Pradesh High Court","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/03\/Madhya-Pradesh-High-Court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/03\/Madhya-Pradesh-High-Court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/03\/Madhya-Pradesh-High-Court.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/03\/Madhya-Pradesh-High-Court.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":313704,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/02\/10\/provisional-attachment-not-accordance-law-all-consequential-actions-cannot-sustained-madras-hc-sets-aside-order-ed\/","url_meta":{"origin":346343,"position":5},"title":"Madras HC sets aside ED\u2019s attachment order for not being in accordance with law, making consequential actions unsustainable","author":"Apoorva","date":"February 10, 2024","format":false,"excerpt":"Madras High Court noted that even in the counter, ED have not explained how the provisional attachment can be sustained on merits, in view of the sale in favour of the petitioners","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"madras high court","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/08\/madras-high-court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/08\/madras-high-court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/08\/madras-high-court.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/08\/madras-high-court.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]}],"amp_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/346343","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/67512"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=346343"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/346343\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/314802"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=346343"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=346343"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=346343"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}