attachment of property

yes - property can be attached and a stay order for not to sale anybody or status quo can be granted.

The property of a borrower i.e., defendant in a suit can be attached before judgment U/O 38 R 5 of C.P.C.

See if this helps you...

https://www.lawyersclubindia.com/articles/Specific-Relief-Act-1963/1757/#_ftnref22

Section  22. Power to grant relief for possession, partition, refund of earnest money, etc.-

(1) Notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (5 of 1908), any person suing for the specific performance of a contract for the transfer of immovable property may, in an appropriate case, ask for-

(a) possession, or partition and separate possession, of the property, in addition to such performance; or

(b) any other relief to which he may be entitled, including the refund of any earnest money or deposit paid or 1*[made by] him, in case his claim for specific performance is refused.

(2) No relief under clause (a) or clause (b) of sub-section (1) shall be granted by the court unless it has been specifically claimed: Provided that where the plaintiff has not claimed any such relief in the plaint, the court shall, at any stage of the proceeding, allow  for "made to".  him to amend the plaint on such terms as may be just for including a claim for such relief.

(3) The power of the court to grant relief under clause (b) of sub-section (1) shall be without prejudice to its powers to award compensation under section 21.

In P.C. Verghese V. Devaki Amma^[52]  the apex court held  that in view of Section 22 (1)(a) of the Specific Relief Act a decree of partition and separate possession of the property can be granted in addition to a decree for specific performance.

In Satya Narayana V. Yelloji Rao^[53] the Supreme Court has observed that discretion referred in Section 22 of the Specific Relief Act cannot be defined as it is not possible or desirable to lay down the circumstances under which the court will exercise discretion against the plaintiff, but at the same time the said discretion shall not be arbitrary and must be in accordance with sound and reasonable judicial principles.

Goparaju Venkata Bharata Rao V. Nagula Ramakotayya^[54]

There was agreement for sale of property in favour of the plaintiff. The plaintiff was put in possession of suit property. The execution of the agreement was to take place after entire consideration was paid by the plaintiff. The original owner died. Her legatees under will dispossessed the plaintiff and postponed execution of sale deed. The plaintiff proved that the agreement to sell was a genuine document. It was held that the plaintiff was entitled to relief of specific performance of agreement possession of property against the legatees of the original owner property.

^[52] AIR 2006 SC 145

^[53] AIR 1965 SC 1045; Matadeen Agarwal V. Syed Abdul Razzak, AIR 1997 AP 103

^[54] AIR 2001 AP 425

See if this helps you...

https://www.lawyersclubindia.com/articles/Specific-Relief-Act-1963/1757/#_ftnref22

Section  22. Power to grant relief for possession, partition, refund of earnest money, etc.-

(1) Notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (5 of 1908), any person suing for the specific performance of a contract for the transfer of immovable property may, in an appropriate case, ask for-

(a) possession, or partition and separate possession, of the property, in addition to such performance; or

(b) any other relief to which he may be entitled, including the refund of any earnest money or deposit paid or 1*[made by] him, in case his claim for specific performance is refused.

(2) No relief under clause (a) or clause (b) of sub-section (1) shall be granted by the court unless it has been specifically claimed: Provided that where the plaintiff has not claimed any such relief in the plaint, the court shall, at any stage of the proceeding, allow  for "made to".  him to amend the plaint on such terms as may be just for including a claim for such relief.

(3) The power of the court to grant relief under clause (b) of sub-section (1) shall be without prejudice to its powers to award compensation under section 21.

In P.C. Verghese V. Devaki Amma^[52]  the apex court held  that in view of Section 22 (1)(a) of the Specific Relief Act a decree of partition and separate possession of the property can be granted in addition to a decree for specific performance.

In Satya Narayana V. Yelloji Rao^[53] the Supreme Court has observed that discretion referred in Section 22 of the Specific Relief Act cannot be defined as it is not possible or desirable to lay down the circumstances under which the court will exercise discretion against the plaintiff, but at the same time the said discretion shall not be arbitrary and must be in accordance with sound and reasonable judicial principles.

Goparaju Venkata Bharata Rao V. Nagula Ramakotayya^[54]

There was agreement for sale of property in favour of the plaintiff. The plaintiff was put in possession of suit property. The execution of the agreement was to take place after entire consideration was paid by the plaintiff. The original owner died. Her legatees under will dispossessed the plaintiff and postponed execution of sale deed. The plaintiff proved that the agreement to sell was a genuine document. It was held that the plaintiff was entitled to relief of specific performance of agreement possession of property against the legatees of the original owner property.

^[52] AIR 2006 SC 145

^[53] AIR 1965 SC 1045; Matadeen Agarwal V. Syed Abdul Razzak, AIR 1997 AP 103

^[54] AIR 2001 AP 425