Skip to content

The research platform for Indian law — judgements, legislation and the citations between them. Free to search, with the original document behind every result.

A product of LawSathi.

Research

Search Legislation Research tools

Browse

Courts Case types Topics Most-cited judgements Sources

LawSathi

Practice platform Blog

© 2026 LawSathiTerms PrivacyResearch aid, not the official record.

Smt Kaki Santhi Priya Vs Union of India — Banking and Recovery | Andhra Pradesh HC (2025)

Home
Andhra Pradesh HC
2025
Smt Kaki Santhi Priya Vs Union of IndiaSmt Kaki Santhi Priya v. Union of India

Disposed¶48

Smt Kaki Santhi Priya v. Union of India

Andhra Pradesh HC15 Jun 2025WP/13285/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Andhra Pradesh High Court, Amaravati; Writ Petition No. 13285 of 2025; decided 16 June 2025; Coram: Chief Justice Dhiraj Singh Thakur and Justice Ravi Cheemalapati. Petitioner: Smt Kaki Santhi Priya; Respondents: Union of India (Ministry of Finance), Cholamandalam Investment and Finance Company Limited, SHO Tadikilapudi Police Station, Advocate Commissioner N. Divya Naga Sai, and Kaki Pavan Kumar. Subject: challenge to CJM Eluru order in Crl.MP No. 89/2025 dt. 06-03-2025 (Section 14 SARFAESI) directing Advocate Commissioner to take physical possession of scheduled house property with police help. Outcome: disposed of as infructuous on counsel's statement; no costs; miscellaneous applications closed. No merits adjudicated; no precedents cited; limited citation value on SARFAESI Section 14 possession orders.

What did the court decide?

None on merits; the writ petition was disposed of as infructuous with no costs, following counsel's statement that the matter had been rendered infructuous.

Why is it important?

On the statement of learned counsel for the petitioner (Sri R. Leela Sai Sampath, representing Sri R. Siva Sai Swarup) that the matter had been rendered infructuous, the Court disposed of the Writ Petition as infructuous and awarded no costs. ¶48

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

None on merits; the writ petition was disposed of as infructuous with no costs, following counsel's statement that the matter had been rendered infructuous.

Issue for consideration

Whether the impugned order dated 06-03-2025 passed in CRL MP No. 89/2025 by the Principal Senior Civil Judge-cum-Chief Judicial Magistrate, Eluru, directing the Advocate Commissioner to take out physical possession of the schedule property, was illegal, unlawful, violative of principles of natural justice and of Articles 14, 19, 21 and 300A of the Constitution and of Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act, and consequently liable to be set aside.

Court's answer

On the statement of learned counsel for the petitioner (Sri R. Leela Sai Sampath, representing Sri R. Siva Sai Swarup) that the matter had been rendered infructuous, the Court disposed of the Writ Petition as infructuous and awarded no costs.

Ratio / Principle

Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, were directed to stand closed.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Writ Petition (Art. 226, Constitution of India) challenging the order dated 06-03-2025 in Crl.MP No. 89/2025 of the Principal Senior Civil Judge-cum-Chief Judicial Magistrate, Eluru, which directed the Advocate Commissioner to take out physical possession of the schedule property (D.No.2-37, R.S.No.497/26, Kamavarapukota Village, West Godavari District) with police assistance, allegedly in violation of natural justice, Articles 14, 19, 21 and 300A and Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act. Learned counsel for the petitioner stated that the matter had been rendered infructuous; accordingly the writ petition was disposed of as infructuous, with no costs, and pending miscellaneous applications were directed to stand closed. No issue on merits was decided.

A

I

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: AMARAVAJI

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

MONDAY, THE SIXTEENTH DAY OF JUNE

TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

PRESENT

HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE DHIRAJ SINGH THAKUR, THE CHIEF^JUSTICE

AND

HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI

WRIT PETITION NO: 13285 OF 2025

Between:

Smt Kaki Santhi Priya, W/o Kaki Satish, Aged 33 yrs, D.No.3-27, High School Road Kamavarapukota, Panchayat ,and Mandal,^WestGodavari District.

...Petitioner

AND

Union of India, Ministry of Finance Rep., by its Secretary Sastry Bhavan, New Delhi.

Cholamandalam Investment and Finance Company Limited, Rep.,by its Authorized Officer cum Manager Anchala Suresh S/o Sudhakar Rao, Shanti Plaza , Gayathri Nagar, Vijayawada.

The Station House Officer, Tadikilapudi Police Station , West Godavari District.

N. Divya Naga Sai, Advocate Commissioner, Eluru. (Appointed^inCrI MP No.89/2025 of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Eluru)

Sri Kaki Pavan Kumar, S/o (Late) Nageswara Rao Aged 34 yrs, R/at Jangareddy Gudem , Maruthi Nagar, West Godavari District.

...Respondents

i

w,. Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in |N|5irpumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may ? bCleased to Issue a Writ or Order or Direction more particularly one in the Nature of a Writ of Certiorari to Call for the records pertaining to the Impugned Order passed in CRL MP NO. 89/2025 DT,06-03-2025 on the file of Principal Senior Civil Judge Cum Chief Judicial Magistrate at Eluru directing the Advocate Commissioner (R-5) to take out Physical Possession of the Schedule Property i.e., property bearing D.No.2-37 R.S.No.497/26 of Kamavarapukota Village and Mandal, West Godavari District with the assistance of Jurisdictional Police (R-3) on that the Respondents 3 and 4 trying to evict the petitioner's from her possession and enjoyment of the schedule property all are Illegal, Unlawful, Violation of Principles of Natural Justice, Violation of Article 14,19,21,300-A- of the Constitution of India Violation of Section 14 of SARFEASI Act, Consequently to Set-Aside the Impugned Order passed in CRL MP NO. 89/2025 dt 06-03- 2025 on the file of Principal Senior Civil Judge Cum Chief Judicial Magistrate at Eluru by Allowing the Writ Petition in the interest of the justice.

lA NO: 1 OF 2025

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to Stay of the Operation of the Impugned Order passed in CRL MP NO. 89/2025 dt.06-03-2025 on the file of Principal Senior Civit Judge Cum Chief Judicial Magisrate at Eluru including by dispossession of the Petitoiner from the Schedule Premises in CRL MP.No.89/2025 pending disposal of the main Writ Petition in the interest of the justice.

-V

1: h I,

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI. R SIVA SAI SWARUP

Counsel for the Respondent No. 1: SRI PASALA PONNA RAO, DEPUTY SOLICITOR GENERAL OF INDIA

The Court made the following order:

/'

APHC010254272025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH Bench Sr.No:-7 [3483] 05B AT AMARAVATI

APHC010254272025

WRIT PETITION NO: 13285 of 2025

Smt Kaki Santhi Priya

...Petitioner

Vs.

Union of India and others

...Respondents

Advocate for Petitioner

Sri R. Leela Sai Sampath, learned counsel representing Sri R. Siva Sai Swarup.

Advocate for Respondents None

CORAM :THE CHIEF JUSTICE DHIRAJ SINGH THAKUR SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI

DATE : 16th June 2025

P C :

Sri R. Leela Sai Sampath, learned counsel representing^SriR.SivaSai

Swarup, learned counsel for the petitioner, states^{thatthematterhasbeen} rendered infructuous.

Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of as infructuous. No costs.

Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand^closed. SD/- A. VENUGOPALA RAO //TRUE COPY// assistant ^EGISTR^

S ^ OFFICER

To,

One CC to Sri. R Siva Sai Swarup Advocate [OPUC]

One CC to Sri. Pasala Ponna Rao, Deputy Solicitor General^ofIndia [OPUC]

Three CD Copies

GSC

r

HIGH COURT

DATED: 16/06/2025

ORDER

WP.No.13285 of 2025

DISPOSING THE WP AS INFRUCTUOUS

WITHOUT COSTS

Issues for consideration

1 issue framed by the court

AI extract

1.
Whether the impugned order dated 06-03-2025 passed in CRL MP No. 89/2025 by the Principal Senior Civil Judge-cum-Chief Judicial Magistrate, Eluru, directing the Advocate Commissioner to take out physical possession of the schedule property, was illegal, unlawful, violative of principles of natural justice and of Articles 14, 19, 21 and 300A of the Constitution and of Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act, and consequently liable to be set aside.¶22
The court held
On the statement of learned counsel for the petitioner (Sri R. Leela Sai Sampath, representing Sri R. Siva Sai Swarup) that the matter had been rendered infructuous, the Court disposed of the Writ Petition as infructuous and awarded no costs.ratio¶48

Statutes considered

4 provisions across 3 enactments

AI extract

Constitution of IndiaArticle 226¶22 Articles 14, 19, 21, 300A¶22
SARFAESI ActSection 14¶22
Code of Civil ProcedureSection 151¶24

Procedural history

How this case reached the court

AI extract

Order under challenge
Order dated 06-03-2025 in CRL MP No. 89/2025 directing the Advocate Commissioner to take out physical possession of the schedule property (D.No.2-37, R.S.No.497/26, Kamavarapukota Village, West Godavari District) with the assistance of jurisdictional police.¶22
Principal Senior Civil Judge cum Chief Judicial Magistrate at Eluru · 2025-03-06
Prior proceeding
Proceedings in Crl.MP No. 89/2025 before the Principal Senior Civil Judge-cum-Chief Judicial Magistrate, Eluru culminated in the impugned order appointing/directing the Advocate Commissioner to take physical possession of the schedule property with police assistance; the petitioner alleged respondents were attempting to evict her from the property.¶22
Prior proceeding
Interim application IA No. 1 of 2025 under Section 151 CPC in the writ petition sought stay of operation of the impugned Crl.MP order, including dispossession of the petitioner from the schedule premises, pending disposal of the main writ petition.¶24

Parties & counsel

AI extract

petitioner
Smt Kaki Santhi Priya¶12
Sri R. Siva Sai Swarup, Sri R. Leela Sai Sampath
respondent
Union of India, Ministry of Finance, Rep. by its Secretary¶15
Sri Pasala Ponna Rao
respondent
Cholamandalam Investment and Finance Company Limited, Rep. by its Authorized Officer cum Manager Anchala Suresh¶16
respondent
The Station House Officer, Tadikilapudi Police Station, West Godavari District¶17
respondent
N. Divya Naga Sai, Advocate Commissioner, Eluru¶18
respondent
Sri Kaki Pavan Kumar¶19

Coram

AI extract

Justice Dhiraj Singh Thakur (The Chief Justice)member¶43
Justice Ravi Cheemalapatimember¶43

Case details

As recorded by the court registry

Court: Andhra Pradesh HC
Decided on: 15 Jun 2025 · June
Registered: 8 May 2025
Case no.: WP/13285/2025
CNR: APHC010254272025
Topic: Banking and Recovery
Bench: Dhiraj Singh Thakur Ravi Cheemalapati
Disposal: DISMISSED AS INFRUCTUOUS
Case type: Writ Petition

Similar cases

Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court

Finding judgements on the same questions…

More from Dhiraj Singh Thakur Ravi Cheemalapati

K.Md.Sadiq and 10 Others Vs Cheif Executive Officer (Wakf) and 3 Others
26 May 2025
Central Bank of India, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh
20 May 2025
Kosuri Radha Vs the State of Ap
19 May 2025
A.Lakshman Rao Vs The District Collector, Guntur District, Guntur
15 Jun 2025
M/S Vedasam Vs Union Bank of India
15 Jun 2025
Syed Mahmud Vs the State Bank of India
15 Jun 2025

Cite this judgement

Smt Kaki Santhi Priya v. Union of India, WP/13285/2025 (AP), decided on 15 June 2025.

The High Court of Andhra Pradesh publishes no neutral citation for this judgement — cite it by case number and date of decision.

Statutes4

Constitution of IndiaArticle 226 · Articles 14, 19, 21, 300A
SARFAESI ActSection 14
Code of Civil ProcedureSection 151

View all statutes

Procedural history3

Order dated 06-03-2025 in CRL MP No. 89/2025 directing the Advocate Commissioner to take out physical possession of the schedule property (D.No.2-37, R.S.No.497/26, Kamavarapukota Village, West Godavari District) with the assistance of jurisdictional police.Principal Senior Civil Judge cum Chief Judicial Magistrate at Eluru · 2025-03-06
Proceedings in Crl.MP No. 89/2025 before the Principal Senior Civil Judge-cum-Chief Judicial Magistrate, Eluru culminated in the impugned order appointing/directing the Advocate Commissioner to take physical possession of the schedule property with police assistance; the petitioner alleged respondents were attempting to evict her from the property.
Interim application IA No. 1 of 2025 under Section 151 CPC in the writ petition sought stay of operation of the impugned Crl.MP order, including dispossession of the petitioner from the schedule premises, pending disposal of the main writ petition.

View full history

Bench / Coram

Justice Dhiraj Singh Thakur (The Chief Justice) and Justice Ravi Cheemalapati

Parties & counsel