Disposed

M/s. Sree Divya Industries and another v. The Ministry of Financial Services and 2 others

Telangana HC11 Aug 2021WP/17741/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Special Bench dismissed the writ petition seeking mandamus against a final notice for removal of material and machinery under SARFAESI Act, 2002, holding that the petitioners had already availed alternate remedy via Special Appeal No.49 of 2021 pending before the Debts Recovery Tribunal.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition disposed of; liberty granted to raise all contentions in Special Appeal No.49 of 2021 pending before the Tribunal. No order as to costs.

M/s. Sree Divya Industries and another Vs The… — Banking and Recovery | Telangana HC (2021)

¶1

HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

¶2

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶3

WEDNESDAY ,THE ELEVENTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY ONE

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE A.RAJASHEKER REDDY

¶6

AND

¶7

THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE SHAMEEM AKTHER

¶8

WRIT PETITION NO: 17741 OF 2021

¶9

Between:

¶10

M/s. Sree Divya lndustries, Rep. by its Proprietor, Sri.Ch.Yesuratnam, S/o Sri.Yacob Plot No.'189/C, lDA, Phase-ll,Cherlapally, Hyderabad- 500 051.

¶11

2, Shri. Chatragadda Yesuratnam, S/o. Sri.Yacob Aged about 34 years, Occ. Proprietor of [vl/s. Sree Divya lndustries, R/o. Plot No.3, Bhavani Nagar, Road No.8N, ECIL Post, Hyderabad- 500 062.

¶12

...PETITIONERS

¶13

AND

¶14

The lt4inistry of Financial Services, Represented by the Under Secretary to the Government of lndia.

¶15

Bank Of lndia, Vasavinagar Branch, Laxmi Enclave lanbe.Opp.Furniture World, Vasavinagar, Secunderabad - 500 062., Represented by its Authorized l,,4anagar,

¶16

l,4/s Daniel Plasto Craft, Represented by the Proprietor Sri.Joseph Jaya Kumar S/o Sri.Rajan,Aged about 62 Years. situated at UDL ll, Gandrajupalli, Gangavaram Mandal, Chittor Dt AP

¶17

...RESPONDENTS

¶18

Petition under Artrcle 226 of the Constitution of lndia praying that n the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a Writ or direction more particularly in the nature of l,4andamus declarrng that the Frnal notice for removal of Material and [,4achinery belonging to Petitioner No.1 concern held in the auctioned and physical possession taken property situated at Cherlapally Plot No. 189/C, IDA Phase-ll, Cherlapally issued by the Respondent No.2, Dated. 0510712021, while operation of orders in SUOMOTU WRIT PETITION URGENTTNO.3 OF 2021, dated 30th April,2021 and subsequent extensions of such order on 1810612021 and 1510712021 , amounts to depading from the binding effect of the directions issued by this Honorable High Court under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of lnida, taken on account of SUO MOTU COGNIZANCE, besides repository of administrative Power, arbitrary or unreasonable that no fair minded authority could ever have made resulting to violation of Article 14 of the constitLttion

¶19

lA NO; 1 OF 2021

¶20

Petilion under Section^'1 51 CPC praying that in the circumstances stateti in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High court may be pleased pendrng disposal of the wrrt above to stay all further proceedings to be initiated against the petitioners, by the Respondent No.2 in pursuance to lhe Final Notice dated 05.07.2021 and to pass

¶21

IA o F 021 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the clrcumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High CoL rt may be pleased to pleased pending disposal of the Writ above District the Re,spondent No 3 not to alienate, mortgage, alter the structure of the property, creilte third party interest whether Direct or lndirect (including Lease) or deal with the property any manner, except for its occupancy to run its legal business in the^pro rerty subject matter of the Final Notice dated 0510712021 of Respondent No 2

¶22

Counsel for the Petitioner(s): SRl. ARUN KUMAR SATYAVOLU

¶23

Counsel for the Respondent No.1: NAMAVARAPU RAJESHV/AR RAO(ASSGI) Counsel for the Respondent No.2: SMT T VIDYA RANI^(SC F()R BOI)

¶24

Counsel for the Respondent No.3:^-----

¶25

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶26

HON'BLE SRI ]USTICE A.RAJASHEKER REDDY AND HON'BLE DR, JUSTICE SHAMEEM AKTHER

¶27

Writ Petition No.17741 OF 2021

¶28

ORDER:(per Hon'ble Sri lustice A.Raiasheker Reddy)

¶29

This Writ Petition is filed seeking writ of mandamus declaring the final notice for removal of Material and machinery belonging to the petitioner No.l held in the auction and physical^possession taken of the property situated at Cherlapally Plot No.1B9/C, IDA Phase-II, Cherlapally issued by the 2nd respondent dated 05.07.2021,whi1e operation of orders in Suo Motu Writ Petition^(Urgent) No.3 of 2021, dated 30.04.2021. and subsequent extensions of such order^on 18.06.2021 and 15,07.2021 amounts to departlng From the bindinq eFfect of the directions issued by thls Ccrr rt

¶30

Heard Srr Arun Kurrar Satyavc u, learned COUnsL'l^i'or iirt petitroners, Smt.T.ViCya Rani, learned counsel for the 2 ''' responde rrt and Sri Ambadipudi Satyanarayana, learned counsel^for the³ respondent.

¶31

Learned counsel for the^petitioners submits that the^BanK officials have misrepresented before this Court as^{well as before the} Debts Recovery Tribunal.

¶32

In this case, it is to be seen that the^{petitioners have already} filed W.P.No.3464 of 2021 assailing the^{proceedingsinitiatedunder} Section 14 of the Securitization & Reconstruction of^{Financial Assets} & Enfor-cement of Security Interest Act,^{2002 (for short'theAct of} 2OA2') and the said writ^petition was disposed of on^15.02.2021 relegating the parties therein to avail alternate^{remedy and that the} petitioners have avalSd alternate remedy by rlay of S.A^{No,'19L-r f} 2021 ar'1 tne oresent rnrpugned not cc i5^on v^{for rcnrl\ r''i il'rj}

¶33

articles from the premises. It is also submitted that possession was already taken on 03.03.2021.

¶34

When S.A. No.49 of 2027 is stated to [,e filed against proceedings inltiated under section 14 0f the Act of 2002 and same s pendrng before the Tribunal, the notice dated 05.07.2021 is only off-shoot proceedings, we do not see any reason to entertain the writ petition.

¶35

Accordingly, this Writ petition is disposed of granting liberty to the petitioner to avail remedy in S.A. No.49 of 2O2t against the impugned proceedings. It is open for the petitioners; to raise ail the contentions raised herein and all other contentions available to them under law before the Tribunal in S.A.No.49 of ZO21 , if they are so advised, and obtain orders before the Tribunal.

¶36

There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous applications, if any, pending in this writ petition shail stand disposed of.

¶37

//TRUE COPY//

¶38

SD/.K.AMMAJI ASS STANT REGISTRAR Y-.-" SECTION OFFICER

¶39

To.

¶40

One CC to Sri Arun Kumar Satyavolu Advocate [OPUC] 2 One CC to Sri Namavarapu Ra.leshwar Rao(ASSG l) Advocirte [OPUC] 3 One CC to Smt T Vidya Rani (SC FOR BOI)Advocate [OPt]Cl 4 Two CD Copies 5 One Spare copies tUBC

¶41

HIGH COURT

¶42

DATED:1110812021

¶43

ORDER WP.No.17741^{of 2021}

¶44

t- S I
(
t
.)
:) ,l
01 sEP2021
rgL)
t

¶45

DISPOSING^{OF THE WRIT PETITION} WITHOUT^COSTS

¶46

<br>€:
al

M/s. Sree Divya Industries and another v. The Ministry of Financial Services and 2 others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/s. Sree Divya Industries and another v. The Ministry of Financial Services and 2 others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Smt. Sneha Singh Vs The State of Telangana and 2 Others

Bukhari Kishen Rahul Singh Vs The State of Telangana

Mohammed Amjad Vs The State of Telangana

Shikari Mangamma Vs The Debts Recoery Tribunal-2

M/s Akshitha Green Space Lts and another Vs Recovery officer-I and another

M/s. Terus Disinfectant Solution Pvt. Ltd. Vs Andhra Bank And Another