- (1.) This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal has been filed by the appellant against the fair and decretal order, dated 04.09.2014, passed in I.A. No. 461 of 2014 in O.S. No. 124 of 2014, on the file of V Additional District Court, Madurai. The appellant is the second defendant in O.S. No. 124 of 2014 and second respondent in I.A. No. 461 of 2014 on the file of V Additional District Court, Madurai. The first respondent filed the suit for recovery of money due and payable by the second respondent in the business transaction. The appellant is the mother of the second respondent and according to the first respondent, she guaranteed due repayment by her son, the second respondent herein. She deposited the title deeds relating to her property and created an equitable mortgage. However, the second respondent and the appellant did not pay the amounts due to the first respondent. Therefore, the first respondent has filed a suit for recovery of money. Along with the suit, he has filed an application in I.A. No. 461 of 2014, for a direction to the second respondent and the appellant, to furnish security to the tune of Rs. 12,00,000/-. Notices were ordered to the second respondent and the appellant to furnish security, to the tune of Rs. 12,00,000/-, with a condition that in the event of failure to furnish security, an order of attachment before the Judgment would be passed. The second respondent and the appellant did not furnish any security. Therefore, on 20.08.2014, ad-interim attachment was ordered.
(2.) The second respondent filed counter affidavit denying his liability to pay a sum of Rs. 11,06,556.54, as claimed by the first respondent in the suit. He has stated that he filed O.S. No. 271 of 2013 on the file of Principal District Munsif Court, Madurai, against the first respondent for permanent injunction. In the said suit, the first respondent filed a written statement, to the effect that a sum of Rs. 4,07,031/- is only due and payable by the second respondent. Suppressing these facts, the first respondent has filed the suit for recovery of money to the tune of Rs. 11,06,556.54 and also has filed the application for attachment before Judgment.
(3.) The appellant in her counter, denied having guaranteed due repayment of amount due and payable by the second respondent herein. She also denied that she had created equitable mortgage, by depositing the title deeds relating to the petition property. She has also stated that she has no intention to alienate the property sought to be attached to any third party, without permission of the Court.;