Sri Vottam Chennaiah, Vs The Authorised Officer

¶1

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO AND

¶2

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G.KRISHNA MOHAN REDDY

¶3

WRIT PETITION NO.19860 OF 2010

¶4

ORDER: (Per the Hon’ble Sri Justice V.V.S.Rao)

¶5

The petitioner availed loan of Rs.3,75,000/- by creating mortgage by depositing title deeds in respect of house property. When the loan became non-performing asset, the first respondent issued notice of demand under Section 13(2) of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (hereafter, the SARFAESI Act or the Act), demanding payment of Rs.3,70,059/-. The petitioner could not pay. Therefore, possession notice dated 27.04.2010 under Section 13(4) of the Act was issued. This was followed by auction notice dated 10.07.2010. Aggrieved, the petitioner filed the instant Writ Petition seeking invalidation of the proceedings under the SARFAESI Act.

¶6

The counsel for the petitioner submits that during the pendency of the Writ Petition, the petitioner has repaid substantial loan amount and the amount due as on 07.03.2012 is about Rs.1,65,631/-. To substantiate, he placed before us the computer generated statement of account bearing No.62010817441 of State Bank of Hyderabad, Anandnagar Branch. A perusal of the same would show that the petitioner’s outstanding balance stands at Rs.1,65,631/-. In view of the same, we give liberty to the petitioner to approach the bank and negotiate for realising the loan instalments or for settlement of the account. Observing thus, we are not inclined to grant the relief as prayed for.

¶7

The Writ Petition, with the above observations, stands disposed of without any order as to costs. WPMP.No.25160 of 2010 shall stand disposed of.

¶8

_______________ (V.V.S.RAO, J)

¶9

_________________________________ (G.KRISHNA MOHAN REDDY, J)

¶10

2^nd April 2012 RRB

Sri Vottam Chennaiah, v. The Authorised Officer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri Vottam Chennaiah, v. The Authorised Officer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

The Managing Director (Meda Srinivas), Vs The Honourable A.P. State Consumer Disputes Redressal

P. Gangadhara Prasad Vs The Authorised Officer, Indian Bank

Sri.N.Krishna Murthy Naidu Vs State Bank of Hyderabad,Msme Medchal Ie Branch

Sri Bollu Srinivas, Vs The Branch Manager

Sri Sai Krishna General Engineering Works, Vs The Regional Manager, State Bank of Hyderabad

Tadepalli Sivalingeswara Rao, Vs Central Bank of India