Sri Harsha Innovative Educational Society, Vs The Union of India

SRI HARSHA INN O VATIVE EDUCATIONAL SOCIET Y ,, REP.BY ITS CORRESPONDEN T N. MADHAVI, AGED 46 YEARS, R /O. DOOR NO56-10-40, PLOT N O-10, P AND T COLONY-3, PATAMATA, VIJAYAWADA - 52 0 008.

¶11

YALAMANCHILI S W ARAJYALAKSHMI,, W/O. VENKATARAO, AGED 73 YEARS, OCC B USINESS, R/O. DOOR NO.-56-10- 4 0, PLOT NO10, P AND T COL O NY-3, PATAMATA, VIJAYAWADA - 5 20008.

¶12

NUKAVARAPU H A NUMAIAH CHOWDARY,, S/O. NA G ESWARRAO, AGED 53 YEARS, O CC BUSINESS, R/O. DOOR NO.-5 6 -10-40, PLOT NO-10, P AND T COLONY-3, PATAMATA, VIJAYAWA D A-520008.

¶13

NUKAVARAPU M A DHAVI,, W/O. HANUMAIAH CHOWDARY, AGED 46 YEARS, OCC S CHOOL CORRESPONDENT, R/O. DOOR NO-5610 -40, PLOT N O-10, P AND T COLONY-3, PATAMATA, VIJAYAWADA - 52 0 008.

¶14

KATURI ABHISHE K RAJU,, S/O. BHASKAR RAO, AG E D 29 YEARS, OCC BUSINESS, R/O. DOOR NO.4-132/B S URAMPALLE, VIJAYAWADA- 521212.

¶15

...PETITIONER(S)

¶16

AND

¶17

THE UNION OF I N DIA, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY, D EPARTMENT OF FINANCIAL S E RVICES, MINISTRY OF FINANC E UNION OF

¶18

2

¶19

CMR,J & GTK,J W.P.No.31754 of 2025

¶20

INDIA, JEEVAN DEEP BUILDING, SANAD MARG, NEW DELHI - 110001.

¶21

THE DEBT RECOVERY TRIBUNAL, REP. BY ITS REGISTRAR, CHITRALAYA ROAD NEAR LEELAMAHAL ROAD DABA GARDENS, JAGADAMBA JUNCTION, VISAKHAPATNAM - 530 020.

¶22

THE KANAKAMAHALAKSHMI COOPERATIVE BANK LTD, REP. BY ITS AUTHORISED OFFICER, GURUNANAK COLONY, VIJAYAWADA - 520008.

¶23

...RESPONDENT(S):

¶24

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased tomay be pleased to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS declaring the action of 2nd Respondent in not deciding Petitioners Stay Application in I.A. No. 4246 of 2025, dated 06.11.2025 filed under Section 17 of the Secularization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 in SA. No. 667 of 2025 and further action of 3rd Respondent in deciding to take possession of petitioners secured property of an RCC residential building (G plus 2) bearing Door No. 56-10-40, situated in R.S. No. 172/2B, Assessment No. 1073139274, located at Ganapathi Sachidananda Ashramam Road, Patamata Road, Vijayawada - 520008 and proposing for auction, as illegal, irregular, irrational and against principles of natural justice, violative of provisions of the Secularization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 and Rules framed thereunder and offends Articles 14, 21 and 300-A of Constitution of India and consequently direct the 2nd Respondent to decide said stay application filed by the Petitioners in SA No.667 of 2025 restraining the Respondent No. 3 from taking possession and conducting auction of said property and pass such

¶25

IA NO: 1 OF 2025

¶26

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 may be pleased to direct the 3rd Respondent not to take possession of an RCC residential building (G+2) bearing Door No. 56-10-40, situated in RS No. 172/2B, Assessment No. 1073139274, located at Ganapathi Sachidananda

¶27

3

¶28

CMR,J & GTK,J W.P.No.31754 of 2025

¶29

Ashramam Road, Patamata Road, Vijayawada-520008, pending disposal of the main Writ Petition and pass such

¶30

Counsel for the Petitioner(S):

¶31

1.PALA KARTHI KIRAN

¶32

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

¶33

¶34

4

¶35

CMR,J & GTK,J W.P.No.31754 of 2025

¶36

The Court made the following:

¶37

ORDER: (Per Hon’ble Sri Justice Cheekati Manavendranath Roy)

¶38

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners.

¶39

Petitioner Nos.1 and 2 are the borrowers, who availed loan from respondent No.3-Bank. Petitioner Nos.3 to 5 are the guarantors, who offered their property as security for re-payment of the loan availed by petitioner Nos.1 and 2. As the borrowers committed default in re-payment of the loan amount, the Bank has initiated the proceedings under the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (for short ‘SARFAESI Act’). The possession of the secured asset is sought to be taken under the SARFAESI Act. Therefore, challenging the said proceedings, the petitioners have approached the Debts Recovery Tribunal, Visakhapatnam, by way of filing S.A.No.667 of 2025 and along with the said application, they have filed an interlocutory application seeking stay of the proceedings.

¶40

Now, the only limited grievance of the petitioners is that even though there is an urgency to hear the stay petition and to dispose of the same that the Tribunal has posted the matter to a distant date i.e., 10.12.2025 and as there is an urgency in the matter, as the possession of the secured asset may be taken pursuant to the proceedings initiated under the SARFAESI Act at any moment of time, the petitioners sought direction to the Tribunal to dispose of the said stay application expeditiously.

¶41

Therefore, in view of the said limited grievance of the petitioners in this writ petition, the Writ Petition is disposed of with a direction to the Debts Recovery Tribunal, Visakhapatnam, to hear the stay application in I.A.No.4246 of 2025 expeditiously and preferably on or before 04.12.2025 and dispose of the same, on merits, according to law by 04.12.2025. Till 04.12.2025, there shall be a direction to the respondent No.3-Bank not to take possession of the property. If the petitioners fail to get ready for hearing in the stay petition and

¶42

5

¶43

CMR,J & GTK,J W.P.No.31754 of 2025

¶44

co-operate with the Tribunal to dispose of the stay petition on or before 04.12.2025, the stay stands vacated without any further reference to the Court. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶45

As a sequel, Interlocutory Applications pending, if any, shall stand closed.

¶46

________________________________________ JUSTICE CHEEKATI MANAVENDRANATH ROY

¶47

_____________________________ JUSTICE TUHIN KUMAR GEDELA

¶48

Date: 19.11.2025 MDP

Sri Harsha Innovative Educational Society, v. The Union of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri Harsha Innovative Educational Society, v. The Union of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Nadendla Mabunni Vs the State of Ap

M/s Vennala Poultries, Vs The Union of India

Kampa Sagaramma Vs The Station House Officer

Doosari Grasamma, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Doddi Venkata Lakshmi Vs Canara Bank

Shulam Eswaraiah Vs Hinduja Housing Finance Ltd.