Killiseshu Mohan Appala Naidu Vs the Union… — Writ and Judicial Review | Andhra Pradesh HC (2026)

Killiseshu Mohan Appala Naidu Vs the Union… — Writ and Judicial Review | Andhra Pradesh HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Withdrawal permitted pursuant to the memo dated 04.07.2026; Writ Petition dismissed as withdrawn; no order as to costs; miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed.

Issue for consideration

Whether the action of the 1st and 2nd respondents (Union Bank of India) in taking steps for registering and transferring to the 4th respondent the registered memorandum of deposit of tile bearing no 2607/2010 and the registered tile deed bearing no 3519/2009 (property stated to have been purchased by the petitioner under registered sale deed No. 2685/2015) was illegal, arbitrary and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India. +1 more

Ratio / Principle

The Court placed the withdrawal memo dated 04.07.2026 on record, accorded permission for withdrawal, and dismissed the Writ Petition as withdrawn, with no order as to costs; miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed. No substantive adjudication on the merits of either issue took place.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Amaravati (Special Original Jurisdiction) | Writ Petition No. 8939/2023 | Justice Ravi Cheemalapati (single member) | Decided 14.07.2026. Petitioner Kiliseshu Mohan Appala Naidu (businessman, Amadalavalasa Municipality, Srikakulam District) had prayed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for a declaration that the action of respondents 1 and 2 (the Union Bank of Inda/Union Bankof India, as printed — represented by its Chief General Manager, Vijayawada, and by its Authorized Officer and Chief Manager, Amadalavalasa Branch) in taking steps for registering and transferring to the 4th respondent (Gavaraanatarao) the registered memorandum of deposit of tile bearing no 2607/2010 and registered tile deed bearing no 3519/2009 — property the petitioner states he purchased under registered sale deed No. 2685/2015 — was illegal, arbitrary and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India, and that the Bank be restrained from registering/transferring those documents; IA No: 1 of 2023 under Section 151 CPC sought that interim restraint pending disposal of the writ petition. Respondent 3 was Sri Seepanakoteswara Rao, Proprietor. Before any adjudication on merits, counsel for the petitioner filed a memo dated 04.07.2026 before the Registry seeking permission to withdraw; the Court placed it on record, accorded permission, dismissed the Writ Petition as withdrawn with no order as to costs, and ordered miscellaneous applications pending, if any, to stand closed. No precedent is cited anywhere in the judgment and no substantive issue was examined.

[3332]

APHC010174852023

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

TUESDAY, THE 14^th DAY OF JULY 2026

PRESENT

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI

WRIT PETITION NO: 8939/2023

Between:

KILLISESHU MOHAN APPALA NAIDU, S/O LAXMANA RAO, AGED. 48 YEARS OCC. BUSINESS, NEAR GOVERNMENT JUNIOR COLLEGE, AMADALAVALASAMUNICIPALITY, SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT.

...PETITIONER

AND

THE UNION BANK OF INDA, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF GENERAL MANAGER, VIJAYAWADA.

THE UNION BANKOF INDIA, REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORIZED OFFICER AND CHIEF MANAGER, AMADALAVALASA BRANCH, SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT.

SRI SEEPANAKOTESWARA RAO, S/O LATE SIMHADRI, PROPRIETOR, R/O CHINTHALABADAVANGI VILLAGE, KARAKAVALASA POST AND PANCHAYAT, L.N.PETA MANDAL, SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT.

GAVARAANATARAO, S/O NOT KNOW TO THE PETITIONER AGE 52 YEARS, OCC BUSINESS GARLAPADU VILLAGE, HIRAMANDALAM MANDAL SIRKAKULAM DISTRICT

...RESPONDENT(S):

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 to issue an appropriate Writ, Order or Direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus to declare the action of the 1st and 2nd

2

respondent in taking steps for registration and transferring the document to 4th respondent in the registered memorandum of deposit of tile bearing no 2607/2010 and registered tile deed bearing no 3519/2009 which was purchased by the petitioner register sale deed bearing No. 2685/2015 and to declare the same as illegal, arbitrary and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the 2nd respondents Bank not to register / transfer the documents to the 4th respondent vide of deposit of tile bearing no 2607/2010 and registered tile deed bearing no 3519/2009 and to pass

IA NO: 1 OF 2023

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 2nd respondent Bank not to register / transfer memorandum of deposit of tile bearing no 2607/2010 and registered tile deed bearing no 3519/2009 to 4th respondent pending disposal of the writ petition and pass such other order or orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit pending disposal of the above writ petition and to pass

Counsel for the Petitioner:

1.CH S V SURAJ

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

1.ANGURU NARAYANA RAO

2.V DYUMANI

The Court made the following:

3

ORDER:

Sri Ch.S.V.Suraj, learned counsel for the petitioner, submitted that a memo dated 04.07.2026 has been filed before the Registry seeking permission of this Court to withdraw the Writ Petition.

The same is placed on record.

Permission is accorded.

Accordingly, the Writ Petition is dismissed as withdrawn . There shall

be no order as to costs.

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

_____________________________

JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI

Date: 14.07.2026. JLV

4

140

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI

WRIT PETITION NO: 8939/2023

Date: 14.07.2026 JLV