Satthala. Subbamma, v. State of A.P.
Case brief
What is this about?
WP 2779 of 2025, High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Amaravati, decided 06-02-2025 by Dhiraj Singh Thakur, CJ and R Raghunandan Rao, J. Petitioners: Satthala Subbamma and another (counsel: B M Patro); Respondents: State of A P and others. Writ petition disposed of without adjudication on merits as an alternative remedy was available before the Debts Recovery Tribunal; writ jurisdiction under Article 226 declined relying on Radha Krishan Industries v. State of Himachal Pradesh (2021) 6 SCC 771 and United Bank of India v. Satyawati Tondon (2010) 8 SCC 110. Keywords: Article 226; alternative remedy; Debts Recovery Tribunal; writ jurisdiction; no costs.
What did the court decide?
In view of the availability of an alternative remedy before the Debts Recovery Tribunal, the Court did not find it a fit case to invoke its extra-ordinary writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, considering the ratio of the Apex Court judgments in Radha Krishan Industries v. State of Himachal Pradesh and United Bank of India v. Satyawati Tondon.