In a recent judgment the Andhra Pradesh High Court observed that the Court can’t pass injunction order or attachment to secure debt when matter is pending in other writ petitions. The petitioners in the present matter is Pathakhadarabad Handloom.
The amended prayer made in the present writ petition is in the nature of an injunction being sought against the payment to be made by the Respondent No.2 to the Respondent No.6. This prayer is made on the basis that there are certain amounts due from the Respondent No.2 to the present writ petitioners.
The instant writ petitioners intended to secure the amounts by seeking an injunction to the effect that the money shall be kept in reserve through an Order of this Court until the amounts are paid to them by the Respondent No.2. The prayer in the pending writ petitions is being contested by the Respondent No.2 herein/APCO (A.P. State Handloom Weavers’ Cooperative Society Limited).
The Court of Justice Ramakrishna Prasad observed that “This Court is of the opinion that the amended prayer made in the present writ petition is premature in nature and the Court cannot pass an Order in the nature of an injunction or an attachment to secure the debt, which is yet to be finally determined by this Court in the other Writ Petitions, to the detriment of the Respondent No.6.”
The Single Bench further observed that the cause of action for seeking an injunction for securing certain monies lying in the credit of the Respondent No.2, that too to the detriment of Respondent No.6, in the nature of an attachment, cannot be countenanced for the simple reason that without there being a determination of a pending debt, an attachment of this nature cannot be countenanced, especially against the State agency.
Subscribe Taxscan Premium to view the JudgmentSupport our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan premium. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates
