Dismissed

Sri Darshanala Kumar v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC2 Dec 2021WP/31828/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed a writ petition contesting a Demand Notice of Sale issued by a cooperative bank. The Court held the petition lacked merit as the petitioners failed to comply with a prior order directing loan repayment, despite alleging non-application of mind by authorities.

What did the court decide?

The Demand Notice of Sale was not set aside as the petition was dismissed.

Sri Darshanala Kumar Vs The State of Telangana — Writ and Judicial Review | Telangana HC (2021)

¶1

¶2

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

¶3

THURSDAY,THE SECOND DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY ONE

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE T.VINOD KUMAR

¶6

WRIT PETITIO N NO: 3't828 OF 2021

¶7

Between:

¶8

Sri Darshanala Kumar, S/o Late D. Bagaiah, Aged about 59^years, Occupation Business, R|/o H.No.4-13, Athvelly, Medchal,.. Hyderabad 501401 , T.S.

¶9

Smt.Darshanala Kalpana, W/o Sri Darshanala Kumar, Aged about 50^years, Occupation Household, R/o H.No. 4-13, Athvelly, Medchal,^{Hyderabad501401,} T,S.

¶10

Sri. Dhaddu Narsing Rao, S/o D. Swamy, Aged about^{45 years,Occupation} Business R/o H.No.-2-38, Bahadarurpally, Bowrampet Post, Quthbullapur^(lt/), Hyderabad 500037, T.S.

¶11

Sri. Dhaddu Prabhu Kumar, S/o D. Swamy, Aged about^{40 years, Occupation} Business, Fl/o H.No. 2-38, Bahadarurpally, Bowrampet^Post, Quthbullapur^(tt/), Hyderabad 500037, T.S.

¶12

...PETTTTONER(S)

¶13

AND

¶14

1 The State of Telangana, represented^by The Prl.Secretary ,^{Agriculture, AIvl and} Co-op, Secretariat Building, Secretariat, Hyderabad^{400029 T.S}

¶15

The Deputy Registrar / District Co- operative Officer,,^{Medchaltvlalkajgiri,} Collectorate Cohplex, ORR^- Kesara, Medchal^District.

¶16

The Senior lnspector of Co- operative Societies, O/o^{The District Co- operative} Officer, lMedchal Malkajgiri District.

¶17

The Kakatiya Co-operative Urban Bank Ltd, Fl/o.H.No.48-304/1A,^GaneshNagar, Chintal Hyderabad Sri G. Ch.Laxmaninarayana.

¶18

...RESPONDENTS

¶19

Petition under Article 226 of lhe Constitution of lndia^{praying that in the} circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith,^{the High Court may be pleased} to issues a writ order or direction more^{particularly one in the natureof Writ of} lvlandamus declaring the Demand Notice of Sale of Mortgaged^{lmmovableProperty'} in From No 9, Under Rule 52(11)(e) of the^{rules under the Telangana StateCo-} Operative Societies Act Vll of 1964, in E.P. No.^{01/KTCUB/B/2019,dated} 2311012021, issued by the respondent^{No. 2 herein,to the petitionersin the matter} of House No. 4-13, Avthvelly, l,4edchal,^{MedchalMalkajgiriDistrict,Hyderabad} 501401, (Formerly Ranga Reddy District), 500047^{T.S.,admeasuring172 sq yds.,} (143,79 sqmts) and consequently to set-aside the same.

¶20

¶21

lA NO: 1 OF 021

¶22

Petition under se ction 151^{CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in} the affidavit filed in supl^{ort of the petition, the High Courtmaybe pleased to stay all} further^proceedings in^{r rspect of Demand Notice of sale of Mortgaged lmmovable} property, in Form No⁽ , Under Rule 52(11)(e)^{of the rules under the Telangana} State Co-Operative Soc eties^{Act Vll of 1964, in E.P.No. 01lKTcuBlBl2019, dated} 23110t2021 , issued by t^{re respondentNo. 2 herein to the petitionersin the matter of} House No.4-13, Avthve^{ly, Medchal, tr/edchalMalkajgiri District, Hyderabad501401,} (Formerly Ranga Redd^I District), 500047^T.S ,^{admeasuring172 sqyds,(143 79} sqmts),^pending disposr^{I of the mainwrit petition.}

¶23

Counsel for the Petitior er^{: SRI' V YADU KRISHNA SAINATH}

¶24

Counsel for the Respor^{dentsNo' 1 to 3 : GP FORAGRICULTURE(TG)}

¶25

Counsel for the Respor^{dents No. 4 : None APPEAREAD}

¶26

The Court made the fol owing:^ORDER

¶27

THE HON'BLE^{SRI JUSTICET.VINODKUMAR}

¶28

WRIT PETITION^{No.31828of 2021}

¶29

ORDER

¶30

This Writ^{Petitionis flled to declare the Demand Notice of Sale of} Mortgaged^{ImmovablePropertyin Form 9, dated 23'10'202L' issued by} the 2nd respondent,^{as illegal, andto set aside the same'}

¶31

Heard learned^{counsel for the petitionersand learned Government} pleader for Agriculture and co-operation,^{and at their request,the matter} is taken up^{for hearing and disposal at the stageof admission'}

¶32

This Cout,^{by order,dated 18'02'2020'passed in W'P'No'25586of} 2019, while^{disposing of the writpetitlon, directedthe petitionersto make} payment of balance^{loan amount to the 4th respondent within a period of} twelve weeks^{along with interest'Upon such payment'the 4th respondent} was directed^{to close the loanaccount of the petitioners'}

¶33

Admittedly,^{the petitionersdid not comply with the said order of} this Couft.^{Without complying with the said order' the petitionershave} now chosen^{to file the presentwrit petition, inter alia, alleging non-} application^{of mind of the respondentauthoritiesin issuing various} proceedings since,^2019.

¶34

Though the^{petitioners claimthat due to onslaughtof Covid-19'} they were unable^{to comply with the order of this Court'dated 18'02'2020} passed in W.P.No'25586^{of 2020,the propercoursefor the petitioners} would be to^{seek extensionfor complyingwith the said order, which the} petitioners failed to^{do, and filed the present writ petition after a lapseof} more than^{one and half years callingin questionof the proceedings that}

¶35

¶36

were inltiated b'^{the respondentsfor recovery of the outstandingloan}

¶37

amount.

¶38

6 In view⁽ f^{the same, the WritPetition is devoid of merit and is}

¶39

accordingly^{disn ssed.}

¶40

Pending niscellaneous^{petitions,if any, shall standclosedin the}

¶41

light of this^{fina order.No order as to costs'}

¶42

SD/.T.TIRUMALA DEV! ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

//TRUE COPY//

SECTION OFFICER

To,

One CC to SRl. V YADU^{KRISHNA SAINATH, Advocate} [OPUC]

¶48

lrwo CCs to GF FOR^{AGRICULTURE (TG)} ,High^{Court for the Stateof} Telangana. [OU^']

¶49

Two CD Copies

¶50

One spare Copl

MMA

1'BS

HIGH COURT

DATED:0211212121

ORDER

WP.No.31828 o'2021

1 € sl4 14:
C 2'i ilm?0n
o
.L
i-
,'l-,

¶59

DISMISSING TT E WIRT PETITION

¶60

WITHOUT COS S

¶61

Aiil,

Sri Darshanala Kumar v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri Darshanala Kumar v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Smt. Donthi Reddy Anitha Vs The State of Telangana Rep by its Principal Secretary

Jilkapally Laxman Vs The Chief General Manger(Commercial)

Kancharla Gopala Krishna Rao Vs Government of India

G Ramavatharam and 8 Others Vs State of Telangana and 5 Others

Praja Pata Shala Educational Society Vs The District Registrar Officer and 2 Others

S. Pandu Ranga Reddy Vs The State of Telangana and 3 Others