The High Court disposed of two writ petitions filed by a borrower challenging SARFAESI notices for illegal possession of property during the pandemic. The court noted the dispute was settled and dismissed the petitions as infructuous.
Dismissal of writ petitions as infructuous on account of settlement between parties.
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.
HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
(Special Original J urisdiction)
FRIDAY. THE FOURTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY TWO
PRESE NT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE UJJAL BHUYAN AND THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE P. SREE SUDHA
WRIT PETITION Nos.24518 &24614of 2020
WRIT PETITION NO:24518 OF 2020
Between:
Sri Chendrupally Venkataiah, S/o C. H. Peddulu, Hindu, aged about 52 years, Occ: Private Service, Fyo D.No.3-9-585/F, Plot No.17(P) and 18 (P), Road No.2/8, Sri Balajinagar, Near Sahara Estates, Mansoorabad Village, Saroornagar lrilandal, Ranga Reddy District, Telangana State.
...PETITIONER
AND
...RESPONDENTS
Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndiapraying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court maybe pleased to issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate Writ, Order or directionparticularly one in lhe nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaringthe actionof the respondent No.2 in insisting topay the total loan amount by issuing Notice U/S 13 (2) oI SARFAESI Act, dated 511012020 and Notice u/s 13(4) Rule 8of SARFAESI Act, dated 0911212020 durjngthe CovidlgPandomic situation prevailed throughout the country, to takepossession of thepetitioner/Suretypremises bearing D.No.3-9-585/F, Plot No.17(P) and 18(P), RoadNo.2/8,Admeasuring 154 Sq. Yds, situated at Sri Balajinagar, Near Sahara Estates,Mansoorabad Village, Saroornagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District,Telangana State,as illegal and arbitrary and violative of Arlicle14 and 300-Aof The Constitutionof lndia,and consequently direct the respondent No.2 towithdraw theNotice U/S 13 (2) of
t/
SARFAESIAct, date5t1Ot2O2Oand Notice U/S 13 (4) Rule 8 of SARFAESI Act, daledogll2t2o2ototakepossessionofthepetitioner/Suretypremisesbearing D.No.3-9-585/F. Plo No.17(P)and 18 (P), Road No.2/8,Admeasuring1 54 Sq.Yds, situated atiri Balajinagar, Near SaharaEstates' l,4ansooraDad Village, Saroornagar MandaRanga Reddy District, Telangana State,and permit the petitioner to pay the lue amounl byway ofinstalments by reschedulingthe same bygiving reasonabletime, without insistinqto paythe due amountin lumpsum
tl2lt
lA NO: 1 OF 2020
Petition unde Section'151CPC prayingthatin the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in( upport of the petition,the High Court may be pleased to STAY of all furtherproce'dings includingsale in respectof petitio ner/suretyproperty bearing D.No.3-9-5i5/F, Plot No.17(P)and 18 (P), Road No 2/B, Admeasuring 154 Sq. Yds, situ.:ed atSri Balajinagar,Near Sahara Estates, l'4ansoorabad Village, Saroornagi r Mandal,Ranga Reddy District, TelanganaSlate, pending disposal of the writ,etition.
wRlT PETITION NO: 246'14 OF 2020
Between:
Sri ChendrupallyV, nkataiah,S/o C. H. Peddulu, Hindu,ag-ed-abo-ut52 years:O^cc FiivaiJ Sen'rcei Rl, D.No.3-9-s85/F,PlotNo.17(P)and 18 (!). RoadNc 2/B Sri Balaiinaoar. Near Sahara Estates,lvlansoorabad Village.SaroomagarMandal' Ranga RIeOoy Distr)t, Telangana State.
...PET|TIONER
AND
The State of felanqana, Rep. bvlts Principal Secretary' Finance Deoartment Secretariat,lyder;bad,Telbngana State-500 004. 2 n"onijpid< -'6h State Financi5tCorporation. HvderabadBranch5-9-194, Cnirag nti Lince,.Hyderabad, Telangana state-500 001Represented by its Authorised( ficer 3 fr,f7i nS fitn ss Club,H.No.529, H.No.529, First andSecondFloor, Opp Reliance Frr sh, VivekanandaNagarColony'Kukatpally, Hyderubad-72 ' Represente, by its Partner,Ravi Kiran Vangala ...RESpONDENTS
Petition un( er Article226 of the Constitutionof lndiapray ng that in the circumstances sti ted in theaffidavitfiled therewith,the High Court maybe pleased to issue a Writ of Mandamus or any olherappropriateWrit, Order or
l--
directionparticularly one in the nature of Writ of l,4andamus, declaring the actron of the respondent No.2 in insisting topay the total loan amount by issuingNotice U/S 13 (2) of SARFAESI Act, dated 511012020 and Notice U/S 13(4) Rule 8 of SARFAESI Act, dated 0911212020 during the Covidlg Pandomic situationprevailed throughout the country, to take possession of thepetitionerSuretypremises bearing D.No.3-9-585iF, PlotNo.17(P) and18 (P), Road No.2/8, Admeasuring 154 Sq. Yds, situated at Sri Balajinagar, Near Sahara Estates,Mansoorabad Village, Saroomagar Mandal, RangaReddy District, Telangana State,as illegal and arbitrary and violative of Article14 and300-4 of The Constitutionof lndia, and consequently direct the respondentNo.2 towithdraw theNotice U/S 13 (2) of SARFAESI Act, dated 5102020 andNotice U/S 13 (4) Rule 8 of SARFAESIAct, daled 09.12.2020 to takepossession of thepetitioner/Surety premisesbearing D.No.3-9-585/F. Plot No.17(P) and 18(P), Road No.2/8, Admeasuring 154Sq. Yds, situated at Sri Balajinagar, Near Sahara Estates,MansoorabadVillage, Saroornagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy Dislrict,Telangana State,and permit the petitioner to pay the due amount by way of instalments by rescheduling the same bygiving reasonable time,without insisting topaythe due amountin lumpsum.
il3/t
lA NO: 1 OF 2020
Petition under Section151 CPC prayingthatin the circumstancesstated in the affidavit filed in supportof the petition,the High Court may be pleased to STAY of all furlherproceedings including salein respect of petitionersurety property bearing D,No.3-9-585/F, PlotNo.17(P)and 18 (P), Road No.2/8, Admeasuring 154 Sq. Yds, srtuated at SriBalajinagar,Near Sahara Estates, Ntansoorabad Village, Saroornagar l,'1andal, RangaReddy District, TelanganaState. pending disposal of the writpetition.
Counsel for thePetitionerin bothw.Ps: SRl.P VENKANNA
Counsel for the RespondentNo.1inbothW.P.s:GP FOR FINANCE& PLANNING
Counsel for the RespondentNo.z in both W.P.s:SRIM. HAMSA RAJ SC FOR ANDHRA PRADESHSTATE FINANCIAL CORPORATION
Counsel for the RespondentNo.3in bothw'P.s:NONE APPEARED
The Court made thefollowing: COMMON OROER
/
H )NOURABLE SRI JUSTICE UJJAL BHI'YAN AND
H( NOURABLE SMT JUSTICE P. SREE SUDHA
w UT PETI ION os.24518 246L4 of o
COMMON C RDER: lper Hoa bte Sn J&sarce t_tjjat BhuAan)
Heard Mr.P.Venl<anna, learned counsel for the petitioner.s and Mr.M.l lamsa Raj, learned Standing counsel for Andhra Pradesh Sta e Financial Corporation.
3 No lir: issue survives for adjudication in these two writ petitiorls.
stand closec
I
No cot ts_ SD/-K.ONESIM ASSISTANT BFGISTRAR (=[l //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER
To, 1. One CC to Sri P. Venkanna, Advocate IOPUCI 2. Two CCs t r GP for Finance and Planniirg, High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad. [OUTI 3. One CC to Sri M. Hamsa Raj, SC for Andhra Pradesh State Financial Corporatio r [OPUC] 4. Two CD C rpies 5. One Spar< Copy CHR SW ^\k
HIGH COUR'
DATED:04/0:12022
1t{ g S iAI
), C
E I }{An 2rI7-2
-t:.
-tj ,
.. 1..
COMMON O RDER
W.P.Nos.24 i18 &24614 o12020
DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITIONS AS INFRUC TUOUS WITHOUT(:OSTS
x
Chendrupally Venkataiah
State of Telangana
Andhra Pradesh State Financial Corporation
Ujjal Bhuyan
P. Sree Sudha
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
