Justice N Kirubakaran, who described the action by V Vignesh and K A V S Veluchamy as a "first rank collusion with evil design to grab the land of the petitioner Radhalakshmi".
The cost should be paid within four weeks to the petitioner by Vignesh, the judge said.
The Judge also condemned the Sub-Judge of Srivilliputhur for not being vigilant enough to see whether Vignesh, from whom Veluchamy had borrowed Rs 1.28 lakh through a promissory note, had actually attached the property of Veluchamy for not repayment of the money, or the property of Radhalakshmi, who had not borrowed any money from Vignesh.
They cannot mechanically pass orders for attachment without verifying the ownership of the property. The court should have directed Vignesh and Veluchamy to produce documents to arrive at prima facie case that the property being attached belonged to Veluchamy.
Even after Radhalakshmi, who came to know that her property had been attached, filed an application questioning the attachment of her property.
The trial court had returned her petition saying that she had not locus standi nor was she a party to the dispute between Vignesh and Veluchamy.
"It is a collusion between Vignesh and Veluchamy to have a claim over properties of Radhalakshmi and it is an attempt to give legal colour to the alleged right of Veluchamy over the attached properties, which actually belonged Radhalakshmi" the Judge said.
The Judge said that if this novel type of abusing the court process was not deprecated, no property will be safe in the country.