Dismissed

Jakkula Kanakaiah and another v. The Union Bank of India

Telangana HC17 Aug 2021WP/19320/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A writ petitioner sought to declare an order of the Debts Recovery Tribunal illegal and quashing an interim stay. The High Court dismissed the petition as infructuous because the auction proceedings had not been finalized.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition was dismissed as infructuous with a vacating of prior interim orders and closing of miscellaneous petitions.

Jakkula Kanakaiah and another Vs The Union Bank… — Writ and Judicial Review | Telangana HC (2021)

¶1

¶2

HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶3

TUESDAY, THE SEVENTEENTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY ONE

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE A, RAJASHEKER REDDY AND

¶6

THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE SHAMEEM AKTHER

¶7

WRIT PETITION NO: 19320 OF 2021

¶8

Between:

¶9

Jakkula Kanakaiah, S/o. J. Rangaiah, Aged about 45 years, Occ. Business, R/o. H.No. 8-2-684l4SlC, NBT Nagar, Road No.'12, Banjara Hills, Hyderabad -500 034.

¶10

Mrs. Jakkula Lakshmi, W/o. Kanakaiah, Aged about 40 years, Occ. House Wife, R/o. H.No. 8-2-6841451C, NBT Nagar, Road No.12, Banjara Hills, Hyderabad - 500 034.

¶11

...PETITIONERS

¶12

AND

¶13

The Union Bank of lndia, Represented by its Chief lt4a nageriAuthorized Officer, Hyderabad lVlain, Siddambarbazar, Hyderabad, Post Box No. 1 108.

¶14

...RESPONDENT

¶15

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue writ in the nature of Mandamus, declaring the Order Dt.22-07-2021 passed in 1.A.No.114812021 in SA No. 43912018 on the file of Honorable Debts Recovery Tribunal-2 Hyderabad and praying to declare the same as illegal, arbitrary and against the principles of natural^justice and also oppose to Article 14 of Constitution of lndia and consequently allow 1.A.No.114812021 in S.A. No.439/20'18 on the file of Honorable Debts Recovery Tribunal-2 Hyderabad.

¶16

lA NO: 1 OF 2021

¶17

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 stay all further proceedings of the respondents bank, including confirmation of sale, issuance of sale certificate etc in furtherance to the e-auction conducted on 22-07^- 2021 in pursuance to the e-auction Dt. 19-06-2021 for sale of the^petition schedule property on 22-07 -2021 till the disposal of the present Writ Petition.

¶18

SCHEDULE OF PROPERTY

¶19

All that^part and^parcel of baring^{H.No.8-2-6841491C,admeasuring 100 sq. yards or} 83.60 Sq. mtrs along <sup>/ith built up area^{1444 Sq. Feet (consistingof groundand1"t} Floor) situated at NBT Nagar, Banjara Hills,^{Road No.12, Hyderabadand bounded} as follows:

¶20

East : Neighbour Plot West : La ne North: Neighbour Plot South : 30'Wide Road.

¶21

Counsel for the Petitionr:rs: SRl. G.K. DESHPANDE

¶22

Counsel for the Respondent: SRI N.V. SUBBA RAJU SC FOR UBI

¶23

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶24

HON'BLE SRI JUSTI CE A.RA.IASH EKER REDDY & HON'BLE Dr. JUSTICE SHAMEEM AKTHER

¶25

WP No.19320 of 202 1

¶26

ORDER::

¶27

Sri GK Deshpande, the learned counsel for the petitioners

¶28

submits that the subject matter involved in this case has become infructuous as the respondent-bank could not finaljze the auction proceedings pursuant to the impugned order and, therefore, no

¶29

further orders are necessary rn this writ petition.

¶30

Recording the submission made by the learned counsel,

¶31

permission is hereby accorded and tl-re wril petition is dismissed as

¶32

infructuous. Any interim order granted earlier stands vacated

¶33

Miscelleneous petitions, if any pending, shall stand closed. There

¶34

shall be no order as to costs.

¶35

SD/-K.VENKAIAH ASSISTANT REGISTRAB, //TRUE COPY// A,_-.-' SECTION OFFICER

¶36

To, 1. One CC to Sri G.K. Deshpande,^Advocate [OPUC] 2. One CC to Sri N.V. Subba^{Raju, SC FOR UBI} [OPUC] 3. Two CD Copies 4. One Spare Copy arod/

HIGH COURT

DATED:171081i2021

ORDER

W.P.No.19320 of 2021

dE S l Are,
l,^+ )a
v
(t
o
.L
01 $F-Pt$ul >
,)af
i,-

¶42

DISMISSING THE WRIT PETITION AS INFRUCTUOUS WITHOUT COT}']TS

Jakkula Kanakaiah and another v. The Union Bank of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jakkula Kanakaiah and another v. The Union Bank of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

RamtenkiSwarupa Vs The State of Telangana

Ramtenki , Durgam Nirmala Vs The State of Telangana

Mukesh Kumavath, Vs The State of Telangana

Mohd. Azharuddin Vs Mr. K. John Manoj

Katukuri Chandra Shekar Vs The Authorized Officer

C.Satyanarayana Reddy Vs Balaji Colour Laboratories