The High Court dismissed the writ petition declared infructuous. The bank submitted that the petitioner had paid dues, the account was closed under Order to Stop (OTS), and the challenge to asset enforcement was no longer viable.
Writ petition dismissed as infructuous. Pending miscellaneous petitions closed.
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.
HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE U. DURGA PRASAD RAO
Writ Petition No.26619 of 2008
ORDER:
The petitioner seeks Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondent—bank in enforcing the provisions contained in Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Securities Interest Act, 2002 (for short “SARFAESI Act”) in respect of house property of the petitioner bearing D.No.4-64 (Old No.1-45) admeasuring 360 sq. yds. at Kuntaluru, Hayatnagar, Hyderabad as illegal, urtravires and consequently direct the respondents to forbear from conducting auction of the said house property of the petitioner.
Bank to him would submit that as per the said letter the writ petitioner has paid Rs.1.15 lakhs on 27.02.2009 in respect of account of his father late Mr.Yadagari Reddy and consequently the bank has closed the account under OTS and in view of these facts the writ petition has become infructuous and hence the same may be closed.
2
counsel for respondent—bank, the writ petition is dismissed as infructuous. No costs.
As a sequel, pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed.
_________________________ U.DURGA PRASAD RAO , J
Date: 05.10.2018 Murthy
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Writ Petitioner
Bank
U. DUGGA PRASAD RAO
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
