Uppalapati Pattabhi Ramaiah, Vs Pamulapati Aruna

Petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, praying that in the circumstances stated in the grounds filed herein, the High Court may be pleased to set aside the order/ Judgment dated 15.09.2025 in I.A. No 504 / 2024 in O.S. No 191 / 2024, on the file of I Addl. District Judge At Guntur and pass such

¶19

IA NO: 1 OF 2025

¶20

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 order for conditional attachment of the plaint schedule property pending adjudication of the above Revision and pass such

¶21

IA NO: 2 OF 2025

¶22

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 order for conditional attachment of the plaint schedule property pending adjudication of the revision and pass

¶23

IA NO: 1 OF 2026

¶24

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 permit the Petitioner Bank to be impleaded as Respondent No.4 in CRP No.2962 of 2025 pending on the file of this Honble Court as proper and necessary party in the above Civil Revision Petition and pass

¶25

IA NO: 2 OF 2026

¶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 to direct the proposed Respondent not to disburse the balance auction proceeds to the respondents 1to 3 herein trending further orders from the court and pass

¶27

Counsel for the Petitioner:

¶28

Page 3 of 5

¶29

1.P V A PADMANABHAM

¶30

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

¶31

1.CHILUKURI NARENDRA BABU

¶32

The Court made the following:

¶33

ORDER

¶34

Heard Sri P.V.A. Padmanabham, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Chilukuri Narendra Babu, learned counsel for the respondent.

¶35

Assailing the order dated 15.09.2025 in I.A.No.504 of 2024 in O.S.No.191 of 2024 on the file of the I Additional District Judge, Guntur, the above Civil Revision Petition (hereinafter referred to as ‘the revision’) was filed by the plaintiff.

¶36

The revision petitioner, being the plaintiff, filed suit O.S.No.191 of 2024 against the respondents for recovery of the amount. Along with the suit, the plaintiff filed I.A.No.504 of 2024 under Order XXXVIII Rule 5 C.P.C. seeking attachment of the suit schedule property before the judgment.

¶37

The trial Court dismissed the said I.A. on 15.09.2025, against which the present the revision was filed. The trial Court, at paras 8 and 9, observed that the property sought to be attached was already attached in the proceedings initiated under the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (for short ‘the SARFAESI Act’) by a nationalised bank. Aggrieved by the order, the present the revision was filed.

¶38

In the revision, an interim order was passed on 22.01.2026, directing the respondents/ defendants not to create any encumbrance or alienate the

¶39

Page 4 of 5

¶40

suit schedule property for a period of two weeks and the same was extended from time to time.

¶41

Pending the revision, the auction was conducted by the authorised officer of the City Union Bank, on 25.03.2026 and one Anne Taraka Ramesh, S/o Samba Siva Rao became the successful bidder for an amount of Rs.2,50,00,000/-. The successful bidder paid the entire amount to the bank. Thereafter, the sale certificate was also issued on 07.05.2026, and the same was presented for registration.

¶42

The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the claim of the bank as on 08.02.2026 was only Rs.56,87,023/-, whereas the successful bidder deposited Rs.2,50,00,000/- in the bank account and the same is available with the bank.

¶43

Learned counsel for the petitioner further submitted that due to the developments after filing the revision, no further adjudication is required in this revision. However, he would urge the Court to direct the trial Court to consider interlocutory applications filed vide C.F.R.Nos.2365, C.F.R.Nos.2633 and 2034 of 2026, dated 07.07.2026.

¶44

Given the facts and circumstances of the case and the developments pending the revision, this Court is of the considered opinion that the order under revision does not call for any interference.

¶45

Accordingly, this Civil Revision Petition is dismissed. However, the learned trial Court shall consider and dispose of the applications filed by the petitioner vide C.F.R.Nos.2365, C.F.R.Nos.2633 and 2034 of 2026, dated

¶46

Page 5 of 5

¶47

07.07.2026, as expeditiously as possible, keeping in view that the amount is lying with the bank and the petitioner/plaintiff filed a suit for recovery of the amount on the strength of the promissory note, strictly following the procedure. No costs.

¶48

As a sequel, pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed.

¶49

___________________________ JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI

¶50

Date: 10.07.2026 IKN

¶51

Whether the order is :

¶52

Speaking Yes/No / Reasoned Yes/No

¶53

Reportable Yes/No / Non-Reportable Yes/No

Uppalapati Pattabhi Ramaiah, v. Pamulapati Aruna

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Uppalapati Pattabhi Ramaiah, v. Pamulapati Aruna

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

Gudipati James Vs State of Andhra Pradesh

M Y S Subramanyam Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Sri Kondru Vijaya Lakshmi Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

G Sreelatha Vs N Sreenivasa Rao

Chappidi Ravindranatha Reddy Vs Challa Narasamma

Kudupudi Satya Venkata Siva Krishna @ Krishana Prasad Vs Seelam Satya Venkata Ramalakshmi