The High Court dismissed a writ petition challenging an e-auction notice for a mortgaged property, holding that disputed questions regarding forgery and title must be decided by a proper forum on evidence, not in writ proceedings.
Writ petition and interim relief petition dismissed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTI CE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY
AND
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTI CE G.SHYAM PRASAD
WRI T PETI TI ON No.29918 of 2016
06.09.2016
Between:
Nangunoori Vinod Rao
..Petitioner
And
The Authorised Officer, Andhra Bank, Hyderabad and others
..Respondents
Counsel for the petitioner: Mr.G.V.L.Murthy
Counsel for the respondents: --
The Court made the following:
CVNR, J & GSP, J W.P.No.29918 of 2016 06.09.2016
2
ORDER: (Per the Hon’ble Sri Justice C.V.Nagarjuna Reddy)
The e-auction sale notice, dated 01.08.2016, issued by respondent No.1 to the extent it pertains to lot No.A-1 admeasuring 1,600 sq. yds. in survey No.330/B/1, Narsampet Village and Mandal, Warangal District, is assailed in this writ petition.
CVNR, J & GSP, J W.P.No.29918 of 2016 06.09.2016
3
___________________________ C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J ______________________ G.SHYAM PRASAD, J 06th September, 2016 GHN
1 issue framed by the court
Whether a writ petition challenges a property sale notice based on alleged forgery and fraud can be adjudicated via Article 226.
Nangunoori Vinod Rao
The Authorised Officer, Andhra Bank, Hyderabad
C.V. Nagarjuna Reddy
G. Shyam Prasad
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
