Allowed

Dasari Krishna Reddy v. L.I.C.Housing Finance Limited

Telangana HC7 Jun 2022WP/15245/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Telangana High Court held that a sale deed executed after an auction sale and sale certificate issuance under the SARFAESI Act is illegal and a nullity. The court directed the auctioneer to cancel the fraudulent sale deed, register the certificate in favor of the successful bidder, and hand over possession.

What did the court decide?

Cancellation of registered sale deed No. 3693/2020, registration of sale certificate in petitioner's name, hand-over of possession within 30 days, and lodging of criminal complaint against fraudsters.

Dasari Krishna Reddy Vs L.I.C.Housing Finance Limited — Consumer Protection | Telangana HC (2022)

¶1

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

¶2

TUESDAY, THE SEVENTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSANO AND TWENTY TWO

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE UJJAL BHUYAN AND THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE SUREPALLI NANDA

¶5

Between:

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO: '15245 oF 2020

¶7

Dasari Krishna Reddy, S/o.D.Ram Reddy,aged about_ 42 years, Occupation_ Private Emptoyee. Rib. H. No.6-90/1ztt ,ri'si Ftoor,let;rwi ft6;l HyoeirgJda Attapur. Hyderabad,Ranga Reddy Districi. pttrl-SboOiA."^""""

¶8

..."ar,r,or.*

¶9

AND

¶10

1 ll;9;119y_.llqIl?ncg L.lTltgq .tqp.by itsAssociated chief tr.4anaser, Sri t-,.Antt Kumar,Ottice at- 304.1 1 1 Floor,HMDA,lr,4aithrivanam,Ameeipei, Hyderabad-500038.

¶11

Avasaral Hari Prasad, S/o.A.V-enkata Rao,aged about_4g years, occ-private Emptoyee,.R/o_ D. No.42-286195, FIat No. j 08:N/aiuthiiteii&encV, n S.naJ'fpgpr. !yoerabad-062..^{pres-en y residing at H.No.Ca_1qs,flaiNo.004,} Aharya Enctave. Street No. 1 2,Himavath Naoar.Hvderabad

¶12

Smt. G.Yashod ha, Wo. Narsingh ndo a geo:bJ,ui_6C !6lis,occ-Housewife, .^{R/o-PiotNo.6l,LakhminagarC-otony.lt4eirpet,Ranq,(edO!bistricr.}

¶13

o H3l!!L1STy9 Lingam. S,o. Late..B. Na rasimha.aged abour52 years.occ_ b usrness, R/o.2_9'1 , cheerva I village, Keesara N,4andal, N,4edchd_N,4alkalg jri District

¶14

Panchayath Secretary, Cheeryal Villaga and panchayat, Keesara l,4andal, L4edcha-lValka jqiri Diitrict.

¶15

The Sub-Registrar. Stamps and Reg.stration Departn ent, S.R.O. Keesara . K e e sa.a Nl a nd a t. l\4 ed ch a- r,/a I kaj g r.i Dr st ri c t..

¶16

RESPONDENTS

¶17

Petition under At'.icle 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 a writ, order or Direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the Respondents more particularly the Respondent No.1 in dodging to handing overthe vacant physjcal possession with clear title and execute the registered sale deed in favour the petitioner of semi Finished House on plot No.21 part (south side),admeasuring 116 Sq.yards or 96.97 Sq.Meters in Sy.No.S/'l,including with a ptinth area 1276 Sq.Fts. (R.C.C.),Situated at Cheeryal Village and Grampanchayat, Keesara Mandal, Ir4edchalMa lkajg iri District erstwhile Ranga Reddy District, Telangana State,

¶18

violation^of purchased^{under SARFAESI Act} '^{as illegal' arbitrary' unjustice'} principtes of^{natural justice and also contrary to the provisionsof} Transfer^of property Act,1882,^{and consequently directthe Respondent No1 to ta} ke stePs^for cancellation^{of registeredGPA document No 5168/2014dated-27-1} 1-2014-,and subsequent^{Registered sale deed document No 3693/2020'dated-} 18-03-2020, registered^{at S.R'O ,Keesara'in respectof subject land without delay}

¶19

IA o:Petition oF 20^{under Section151CPC prayingthat in the circumstances stated in} the affidavit^{filed in suPPo rt of the petition,the HighCourt may be pleasedto direct} the ResPondent^{No'1 to take appropriate steps for cancellation of GPA document} No.5168/2014^{daled:z7-11-2o14-,a^d subsequent Registered saledeed document} No.3693/2020,^{dated:1B-03-2020, registered at S R O''Keesara'in respect of semi} Finished^{House on PlotNo.21part (southside),admeasuring116Sqyardsor} 96.97^{Sq.tvletersin SYNo.5/1 ,including with apllnth area 1276Sq Fts} (R. C. C. ), Situated^{at CheerYaI Villageand Grampanchayat'Keesara Mandal'} Ir,4edchal^{MalkajgiriDistrict erstwhileRanga Reddy District' TelanganaState'} pending disposal^{of the writ petition}

¶20

Counsel^{for the Petitioner: SRIN' RAMAPPA}

¶21

Counsel^{for Respondent No'1 : SRI PODILA HARI PRASAD} Counsel^{for Respondent No' 4: SRI G' DINESH PATIL} c o u^{n se I f o r Re s p o n de nt N o 5 : s} tr F% I ttlf^{sX^f"t"T.I^t}

¶22

Counsel^{for RespondentNo 6: GP FOR REVENUE}

¶23

The Court^{madethe following:ORDER}

¶24

¶25

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE^{UJJAL BHITYAN}

¶26

AND

¶27

HONOURABLE MRS, JUSTICE^{SUREPALLI NANDA}

¶28

WRIT PETITION No.15245 OF 2O2O

¶29

ORDER: (Per the Hon'ble^{the Justice Ujjal Bhuyan)}

¶30

Heard Mr. N. Ramappa, learned^{counsel forthe} petitioner; Mr. P. Hari Prasad, learned counsei^{for respondent} No.1; Mr. G. Dinesh Patil,^{learned counselfor respondent} No.4; and Mr. V. Madhusudhan^{Reddy,learned Government} Pleader for Revenue for respondent^No'6.

¶31

By Iiling this^{petition under Article 226 ofthe} Constitution of India,^{petitionerseeks a directionto the iirst} respondent i.e., Life Insurance^{CorporationHousing Finance} Limited to take steps for cancellation^{of registered General} Power of Attorney^{(GPA) documentNo 5168 of 2014 dated} 27.11.201.4 and subsequent^{registeredsale deed document} No.3693 ol 2O2O dated^18.03.2020.

¶32

Case of the petitioner is^{that an auctionsale noticewas} issued by the first respondent^{for saie of the schedule} property by way of auction sale^{whichwas proposedon} 27.O2.2O2O. The sale notice^{was published in two daily news}

¶33

¶34

¶35

papers, one in Telugu i.e.,^{"Eenadu"and the other in English} "The Hindu' on^{25.O1.2O2O.Auction sale was proposedby} the first respondent^{becauseof failure of the borrowerto} repay tf.e loan amount.^{Details of the schedule property put} up for auction sale are as^follows:

¶36

"a semi finished house^{on plot No.21 part (south} side), admeasuing 116 sg'^{Yards or96.97} Sq.Meters in Sg.No.S/^{1, includingrt tith plinth area} 1276 Sq. F'ts.^(R.C.C), situated^{at Cheeryal Village} and Grampanchaaat,^{Keesera Mandal,Medchal} Malkajgii Distict erstrtthile^{Ranga Reddg District,} Telangana State".

¶37

4 Accordingly, the auction^{was conductedon 27.O2.2O2O} in which the^{petitionerparticipated. Petitioner'sbid amount} of Rs. 13,10,005.00 was found^{tobe the highest and} accordingly petitioner was^{declared as the successful bidder} by respondent No.1^{vide letterdated O2.O3.202O. It may be} mentioned that^petitioner had^{deposited 25oh of the bid} amount as earnest money deposit^{(EMD) prior to the auction} sale which was Rs.3,31,0O5.O0.^{Thereafter, petitioner} deposited the balance 75o/o being^{Rs.9,79,000.00.Thus,} petitioner paid the entire sale^price of the^{auctioned property.}

¶38

Though petitioner had affixed^{the saleconfirmation} letter dated O2.O3.2O2O at a^{conspicuousplace of the}

¶39

¶40

schedule^{property on 05.03.2020,the same was found} removed on the^{verynext day i.e., on 06'03'2020'}

¶41

On 16.03.2020^{sale certificate was issued by respondent} No.1 in favour^{of the petitioner.It is stated that on the advice} of respondent^{No.1, petitioner had prepared a dra-ftsale deed} which was forwarded^{to the respondentNo' 1 but, the same} was not registered.

¶42

On a visit to^{the site of the purchasedproperty'} petitioner found some^{unknown persons overseeing} construction^{work there in.On being approached,they} declared that^{they are the owrrers of the said property'In} this connection,^{petitioner submitted complaintsbefore} respondent Nos.5^{artd 6.}

¶43

Later on,^{after obtailingrelevant documentsin respect} of the purchased^{property petitionercame to know that the} said property^{was registered in favour of respondentNo'4} through sale^{deed documentNo'3693 of2O2O dated} 18.03.2020 executed^{by respondentNo'3as the GPA hoider} of respondent No.2.^{The sale deed was executedtwo days} after issuance of the^{sa-lecertificateon 16'03'2020 by the}

¶44

¶45

¶46

first respondent^{in favour of the petitioner' By it statedthat} respondent No.2^{is the defaulting borrowerfor whose default} the schedule^{propertywhich was mortgaged by him with} respondent No.1^{had to be auctionsoid by respondent No 1} in which^{petitionerbecamethe successfulbidder'}

¶47

g. On 2a.O5.2O20 petitioner represented before respondent No.1 to take steps^{for cancellationof the registeredsale deed} and to^get the draft^{sale deed registered in favour of the} petitioner and thereafter to^{hand over the peaceful vacant} possession of the^{propertyto him. RespondentNo' 1 in its} reply dated 09.06.2020^{while accepting payment of total sale} consideration by the^{petitionerand issuance ofsale} certificate, however^{expressed its inability to registerthe sale} deed in favour of^{the petitioner.Ctarifyingthat once property} is sold under auction^{purchaseit is the responsibility of the} buyer to take care of^{the property' It is insuch} circumstances, the^{present Writ Petitionhas beenfiled} seeking the relief^{as indicatedabove.}

¶48

. i0. Respondent No.4 has^{fiied counter affidavit'Stand} taken in the counter^{alfidavit is that he had purchased the}

¶49

\ property from respondent No.3 who^{is the GPA holder of}

¶50

¶51

respondent No.2 through a registered sale deed No.3693 of 2020 dated 18.03.2020. The GPA was executed by respondent No.2 in favour of respondent No.3 vide document No.5168 of 2Ol4 dated 27.71.2O74. It is stated that after due verification encumbrance certificate was issued on 13.08.2020 and again on O4.O3.2O21. Therefore, it is contended that respondent No.4 is the bonafide purchaser of the aforesaid property. According to respondent No.4 he is in peaceful possession over the said property and enjoying the same. It is further stated that after purchasing the aforesaid property respondent No.4 had applied for regolaization to the concerned authorities on 15.09.2020 and the concerned authorities regularized the aforesaid residentia_l house property under the Government of Telangana Lay Out Regularization Scheme, 2O2O where-alter he got his name mutated in the revenue record.

¶52

1 1. It is indeed very surprising that despite notice arrd despite being represented by learned counsel, Iirst respondent has not Iiled any counter affidavit. Therefore, the - /^{avermentsmade by the petitionerin the Writ Petitionas} against the first respondent have remained un-controv erted.^n-

¶53

Therefore,^{those wouldbe treated as admitted by the first} respondent.

¶54

Non-frling^{of counterby the first respondent is all the} more objectionable^{because respondent No 1 is prily to the} relevant facts^{pertaining to availing of loan by respondent} No.2 from^{respondentNo.1 and the defaultin repayment of} such loal,^{whichhad compelledrespondent No 1 to go for} auction sale^{of the scheduieproperty'When respondentNo'1} had received^{noticefrom this Court, it was its bounden duty} to have filed^{an a-ffidavit placingbeforethe Court all material} facts which^{were at its disposal'By not liling such affrdavit} or by not^{placing the material facts on record'respondent} No. t has^{\Mith held material information thereby failingto} assist the Court^{in the discharge of its duty'Such conductis} highly dePlorable.

¶55

i3. Respondent^{Nos.2and 3 have alsoopted not to file any} affrdavit in^{the presentwrit proceedingdespite being fu11y} aware of the^{seriousness of the issue Therefore' allegations} made against^{them in the writ affidavithaving gone un-} 'controverted^{woulda-lso be construed as being admitted by} the said respondents.

¶56

¶57

Be that as it may,^{from whatever facts are availabieon} record, it is deducible^{that respondent No.2 was the borrower} of respondent No.1. For^{default inrepaymentof loan,} respondent No. 1 initiated^{proceedings againstrespondent} No.2 under the Securitization^{and Reconstructionof} Financial Assets and^{Enforcementof SecurityInterestAct,} 2OO2 (for short the^{SARFAESiAct), leadingto holdingof} auction sa-le of the^{schedule property.We find from the} translated copy of the^{auction sa-le notice thatthe} outstanding dues of^{respondent No.2 was quantifiedby} respondent No.1 at^{Rs.12,55,89,471'00as on 24} 'Ol '2022' We further find that in^{itsletter dated 02} 'O3 '2O2O respondent No.l had^{informedthe petitioner that during} srrbsistence of mortgage^{of the schedulepropertyin favour of} respondent No.1, the borrower^{had i1legal1y executed GPA at} Kesara Sub-Registrar^{Officer in favour of third party Smt' G'} Yashoda (respondent^{No.3)vide document No.5168of 2014} dated,27.1l.2Ol4^{which however wouldnot affectthe right of} the secured creditor^{(respondentNo. 1) in seliing the schedule} property under the SARFAESI^{Act to recover the dues from} the borrower. This^{also finds mention in the sale certificate}

¶58

dated 16.03.2020^{issued by the first respondentin favour of </sup> the petitioner.^{Itwas mentionedtherein that during} subsistence of mortgage^{of schedule property in favourof} respondent No.1, the^{borrowerhad illegally executed GPA at} Kesara SRO in favour of^{third party Smt. G. Yashoda} (respondent No.3) vide document^{No.5168of 2014 dated} 27 .Il.2Ol4 . We further^{find that auction sa-le hadtaken} place on 27.O2.2O2O and on^{payment of sale price hrst} respondent had issued^{the sale certiflcate dated 16'03.2020} in favour of the petitioner.^{The sale deed on the strength of} which respondent No.4^{claims to be the owner and possessor} of the property is dated^{18.O3.2O2O, which is after the dateof} auction sale i.e., 27.O2.2O2O^{and also aJterthe issuartce of} sale certilicate dated^16.03.2020.}

¶59

Let us now consider^{the relevant legal provistons}

¶60

Section 55 of the^{Transferof Property Act, 1882 lays} down the rights and^{liabilitiesof buyer and seller.As per} Section 55 the seller is^{bound to discioseto the buyer any} material defect in the^{propertyor in the sel1er'stitle thereto of} which the seller is and^{the buyer is not aware and whichthe} buyer could not with ordinary^{care discover;to produceto the}

buyer on his^{request for examinationof documentsof title} relating to the^{propertywhich are in the seller's possessionor} power; to answer to^{the best of his informationa-11 relevant} questions put to him^{by the buyer in respect to the property} or the title^{thereto; on paymentor tenderof the amountdue} in respect of the^{price, to executea properconveyanceof the} property when^{the buyer tendersit to him for executionat a} proper time and^{place; between the date of contract of sale} and deiivery^{of the property to take as muchcare of the} property and all documents^{of title relating theretowhich are} in his^{possession, as an owner of ordinary prudence would} take in respect^{of such property and documents etc'}

¶65

Section 13^{of theSARFAESI Actprovides for} enforcement of^{security interest' Sub-section (1) says that} notwithstanding^{alything containedin Section 69 or Section} 69 (A) of the^{Transfer of ProperlyAct, 1882 any security} interest accrued^{in favour of any secured creditor maybe} enforced without^{the interventionof the Courtor Tribunal by} such creditor in^{accordancewith the provisions of the} SARFAESI Act.^{Sub-section (2) provides for issuance of} demand notice in^{case of defaultby the borrowerrn}

repayment of secured debt and his account in respect of such debt is classified by the secured creditor as non-performing asset (NPA). As per the said provision 60 days time is required to be given to the borrower to make payment. Contents of the demand notice are referred to sub-section (3). As per sub-section (3A), if the borrower makes arry representation or raises any objection upon receipt of the demand notice under sub-section (2), the secured creditor shall consider such representation or objection and if the same is not acceptabie or tenable he shall communicate the reasons for non acceptance of the representation or objection to the borrower within 15 days. The proviso clarifies that the reasons so communicated and the likely action of the secured creditor at the stage of communication of reasons shal1 not confer any right upon the borrower to prefer an application before the jurisdictional Debts Recovery Tribunal under Section 17 of the SARFAESI Act or to the Court of District Judge under Section 17 (A). As per the mandate of subsection (4), in case the borrower fails to discharge his liability in full within the period specified in the demand notice, the secured creditor may take recourse to one or more of the

,$,,

measures as mentioned in^{sub-section (4) to recoverthe} secured debt, which^{includestakingover possessionof the} secured asset of the^{borrower includingthe right to transfer} by way of lease, assignment^{or sale for realizingthe secured} asset.

¶75

Sub-section^{(13) of Section13 is relevart and the same} is extracted hereunder:

¶76

"(13) No borrower^{shaLl,after receipt of notice referred} to in sub-section^(2), transfer^{bg tLtay of sale, lease or} othenaise^(other than in^{the ordinary courseof his} business) ong of his secured^{assetsreferredto in the} notice, tuithout pior ttLitten^{consentof the secured} creditor" .

¶77

18.1. Thus, what sub-section^{(13) of Section 13 says is} that no borrower shall^{after receipt of notice referred to in} sub-section (2) transfer by^{way of sale, leaseor otherwise} (other than in the ordinary course^{of his business), any of his} secured assets referred to in the^{notice without the prior} written consent of the^{securedcreditor. If this provisionis} applicable post Section^f 3^{(2) of the SARFAESIAct, it would} be doubly applicable^{after the secured asset is put to auction} sa,1e and thereafter sold for^{rea,lizationof the outstanding} dues.

¶78

¶79

Section 35^{of the SARFAESIAct clarifiesthat provislons} of the SARFAESI^{Act shail have effectnotwithstanding} anything inconsistent^{there with containedin any other law} for the time being^{in force or in any instrument having effect} by virtue of^{any such 1aw. Thus, this provision clarifies that} the SARFAESI^{Act will have over ridingeffect over otheriaws'}

¶80

Rule 8 of the^{Security Interest (Enforcement) Rules'} 2OO2 dea]s^{with sale of immovable secured assets'}

¶81

Rule 9 deals with^{time of sa1e, issue of sa-1e certificate} and delivery of^{possession etc. Sub-rule (6) of Rule 9 says} that on confirmation^{of saleby the securedcreditor ald if the} terms of^{payment have been compliedwith, the authorized} officer exercising^{the power of sa'le shall issue a certificate of} sale of the immovable^{property in favour of the purchaser in} the prescribed form.^{As per sub-rule (10), the certificateof} sale issued under^{sub-rule(6) shall specifically mention} whether the^{purchaser has purchased the immovable} secured asset^{free from any encumbrances known to the} secured creditor^{or not.}

¶82

¶83

¶84

As already mentioned above, we find that in the sa-1e certificate dated 16.03.2020 respondent No.l had ciearly mentioned that during subsistence of mortgage of the schedule propert5r in favbur of respondent No.I, the borrower i.e., respondent No.2 had illegally executed a GpA at Kesara Sub-Registrar Office in favour of third par|z Smt. G. yashoda (respondent No.3) vide document No.S16B of 2Ol4 dated 27.11.2014 though execution of GpA by the borrower during subsistence of mortgage of schedule property by itself had not affected the right of the secured creditor to sell the schedule property under the SARPAESI Act to recover the outstalding dues. The same also did not materially affect the auction purchaser (petitioner). It affected the auction purchaser when on the strength of the GpA, the sale deed was executed by respondent No.2 through his GpA holder respondent No.3 in favour of respondent No.4 on 1B.OS.2O2O i.e., two days after issuaace of the sale certificate.

¶85

Evidently, such transfer of mortgaged property by way of sa_le after issuance of sa_le certificate is wholly illega1 being irr contravention of sub_section (13) of Section 13 of the SARFAESI Act. Respondent No.2 i.e., the borrower was fully

¶86

1,1

¶87

awa-re that the^{scheduiepropertywas mortgagedby him with} respondent^{No.1 as a security for availingthe 1oan,whichhe} defaulted. It^{was thereafter that respondent No' 1 initiated} steps under the^{SARFAESI Act for recoveryof dues which} ultimately led to^{auction sale of the schedule property'} Despite knowing^{the fact that the schedulepropertywas} mortgaged with^{respondentNo' 1, respondentNo'2 had} executed GPA in favour^{of respondent No'3 to seil the} schedule property.^{Interestingly,the GPA was executed on} 27 .I|.2OI4. For^{more than five years thereafter the GPA} holder i.e., respondent^{No.3 did not do anything' It was after} the schedule^{propertywas auction sold on 27 'O2 2O2O} whereafter sale confirmation^{letter was issued by {irst} respondent on^{O2.O3.2O20 followedby sale certificateon} 76.03.2020, that^{the sameplot was sold by the GPAholderto} respondent No.4^{by way of the sale deed two days thereafter} on 18.O3.2O2O.^{The sequence of events as noticed above} clearly reflects that^{the action of respondentNos'2 ald 3 is} not at al1 bonafide.^{There is clearly an elementof fraud in} what respondent^{Nos. 2 and 3 did ln the circumstances'the} sa-1e of the schedule^{property already auctionsold is nothing}

¶88

(d"

¶89

¶90

but a fraudulent act. Respondent No.2 has not only defaulted in repayment of loan to respondent No. 1 but has also piayed fraud by resorting to illegal sale of the schedule property through respondent No.3 which was already auction sold by respondent No.l in favour of petitioner, following which the sale certificate was issued. The sale deed dated 18.O3.2O2O being in violation of the law and being a fraudulent act can have no legal consequence a,d therefore would be construed to be a nullity in the eye of law.

¶91

a I I .-

¶92

Respondent No. I being the secured creditor who had conducted the auction proceeding for sa.le of the schedule property for realization of outstanding dues cannet simply sit back and allow an unscrupuious borrower to p.lay fraud ald defeat the auction sale by selling the schedule properlr to a third party (respondent No.4) post auction who may be aware or may not be aware of the status of the said property. If he was aware then the third party i.e., respondent No.4 becomes a party to the fraudulent act and if he was not aware then he becomes a victim. In either way there is clearly an element of criminality involved which needs to be investigated ald thereafter ta_i<en to its Iogical conciusion. It is not enough for

¶93

\ \

¶94

¶95

respondent No.1 to auction sale the^{schedulepropertyand} thereafter contend that it has^{nothing more to do. It must} take corrective steps to get the sale certificate^{registered. It is} well settled that an act or a result of fraud is a nullity^and nobody should be allowed to reap the beneltt of^such fraudulent action.

¶96

That being the position, and upon^thorough consideration of all aspects of the matter, we issue^the following directions:

¶97

(i) Respondent No. I shall move respondent No.6 for cancellation of sale deed dated 18.O3.2O2O entered^into between respondent Nos.2 and 3 on the one hand and respondent No.4 on the otherhand.

¶98

(ii) Respondent No. I shall also simultaneously move respondent No.6 for registration of sale certificate dated 16.O3.2O2O issued by it in favour of the petitioner.

¶99

(iii) Upon receipt of the above, respondent No.6 shall deal with both the aspects i.e., cancellation of sale deed dated 18.03.2020 and registration of sale certificate dated 16.03.2020 in accordance with the law expeditiously and at

¶100

¶101

¶102

any rate^{withina periodof 60 days from the date of receipt of} a copy^{of this order'}

¶103

(iv) Thereafter^{respondentNo'1 shall hand over the} peaceful vacant^{possession of the scheduleproperty to the} petitioner^{within 30 days of the decision taken by respondent} No.6 in terms^{of direction No'(iii)above'}

¶104

(v) Authorized^{oflicerof respondentNo'1 shall lodgea} criminal^{complaint/Iirst informationbeforethe''iurisdictional} Police^{Station against respondent Nos' 2 and 3 whereafter} the competent^{policeauthority shall investigate the matter} and^{proceed in accordancewith law'}

¶105

With^{the abovedirections' the Writ Petition is allowed'} However,^{there shall be no order as to costs'}

¶106

Miscella;reous^{petitions'ifany' pendingin the writ} petition,^{shall stand ciosed'} A tt -')

¶107

,^RuEcoPY"^{^'11$1ffi'#r'fii}

¶108

-''':h?3f

¶109

8llL5?'T"J'tiiTi#'3fl'"Jil'?':?fl^{il":":3'[ft1#"[]ii[?*"0-}

¶110

*',;i:::"#^{I I""} ^""""

¶111

i [#***[*iif,ffi

¶112

One CC^{to Sri Podila Hari Prasad,Advocate-(OfUC)} o. one cC to^{Sri G. Dinesh Patil Advocate(oPUC)-} i. il; CC^{io Sii c. Nireno"r Reddv, SCfor Gram P€nchavat(oPuO)} 6. i*" CCi tJ^{CP ForRevenue, High Court for the State of Telangana} tourl 9. Two CD Copies 10. One Spare^CoPY MBC SW

HIGH COURT

DATED: 0710612022

$ g STA7" o
/'<c
//:
//:*
C)
?1 JUt'l ic
[3\r"
.,' .ic

¶118

ORDER

¶119

WP.No.15245 of 2020

¶120

ALLOWING THE WRIT PETITION

¶121

WITHOUT COSTS

¶122

tV
'L/

Dasari Krishna Reddy v. L.I.C.Housing Finance Limited

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dasari Krishna Reddy v. L.I.C.Housing Finance Limited

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

Sri. Sampath Venkata Ramana Vs Edelweiss Asset Reconstruction Co. Ltd.

M/s Kakatiya Cotton Industries Vs The Authorised Officer and 8 Others

Paras Collins Distilleries Private Limited Vs Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax

Union of India, Vs Shri.a v Ranganath IPS

M/s Kirby Building Systems and Structures India Private Limited Vs The Assistant Commissioner

Gorantla Veeraiah Chowdary Vs Bank of Baroda and another