Dismissed

Manne Narsimlu v. The State of Telangana and 3 others

Telangana HC27 Oct 2022WP/39177/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed a writ petition filed by the petitioner challenging the attachment of his property by a bank under the SARFAESI Act. The court held that since the borrower was not arrayed as a respondent and no original application details were provided, the writ petition could not be entertained.

What did the court decide?

None. The writ petition was dismissed without costs.

Manne Narsimlu Vs The State of Telangana and 3 others — Company and Corporate | Telangana HC (2022)

¶1

¶2

l. l' I I I I I I I II t t ,I i l ; I l I

¶3

[^32ss ]

¶4

HIGH COURT FOR^{THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD} (SPecial Original Jurisdiction)

¶5

THURSDAY, THE TWENTY^{SEVENTH DAY OF OCTOBER} TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY^TWO

¶6

PRESENT

¶7

THE HONOURABLE^{THE CHIEFJUSTICE UJJAL BHUYAN} AND THE HONOURABLE SRI^{JUSTTCEC.V.BHASKARREODY}

¶8

WRIT PETITION NO:^{39177 OF 2022}

¶9

Between:

¶10

Manne Narsimlu, S/o^{Kistaiah,Age 42 Years,O-cc. Bq-siness,R/o H. No' 1-76,} FotnireOOipitty Vittage,^{Sanga Red-dy MaMal and Sanga Reddy District, Telangana.}

¶11

...PETITIONER

¶12

AND

¶13

The State of Telanqana,^{rep., by its Principalsecretary-RevenueDepartment,} Secretariat, BurgulS^{Rama'Krr-sfrnaRao Bhavan, Hill Fort, Adarsh Nagar,} Hyderabad, Telangana^-500063.

¶14

The District Collector,^{Sanga Reddy District, Office of the District Collector,} Sanga Reddy, TS.

¶15

The Tahsildar, Sanga^{Reddy Mandal, Sanga Reddy District, Sanga Reddy,} Telangana.

¶16

Canara Bank, Narayanaguda^{Branch rep., by its Chief [Vlanager and} . Authorized Officer, VUCA Road,^{Opp. ShanihiTalkies, Narayanaguda,} Hyderabad, Telangana^- 500029

¶17

...RESPONDENTS

¶18

petition under Article 226 ol the Constitution of lndia praying that in^the circumstances stated^{in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court maybe} pleased to issue a Writ order or direction^{particularlyonein the nature of Writ of} Mandamus declaring the action^{of the RespondentNos 2 and 3 in rssuing} Proceeding No. B lg3\2l2A22^{dated 24.09.2022by the 3rd respondent'and} taking possession of^{the Petitioner's property M.B.R Garden FunctionHall} consisting of office^{Building and AC SheetsShed in Survey No. 155, situated at} Pothireddypally^{Village,sanga Reddy Mandal and Districtas if said landis} srtuated in survey^{No. 159, situatedat PothireddypallyVillage, Sanga Reddy}

------7 /

{ ,I

J *t H a

Mandal and District without^{any verification and without notice to the Petitioner} and not releasing the^{same Property in spite of getting knowledge of the same} land is situated in Survey^{No. 155 of PothireddypallyVillageas illegal, arbitrary'} unconstitutional and^{in violation Articles 14,21 and 3004 of the Constitution and} set aside the same^{Proceeding No. 8/9302 t2022 dated24.09.2022 anddirect the} respondent Nos. 1 to^{3 to conduct enquiry and release the property of petitioner.}

¶24

lA NO: 1 OF 2022

¶25

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} grant interim suspension of the^{Proceeding No. 8/930212022dt. 24.09.2022 of} the Respondent^{No.3 pending disposalof the above writ Petition.}

¶26

Counsel for the Petitioner:^{SRI LAKSHMIKANTH}

¶27

Counsel for the Respondent^{Nos. 1 to 3: GP FOR REVENUE}

¶28

Counsel for the Respondent^{No.4: NONE APPEARED}

¶29

The Court made the following:^ORDER

¶30

i ! I I I I I i I i

¶31

THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE UJJAL BHIIYAN AND THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.BHASKAR R.EDDY

¶32

WRIT PETITION No.391ZZ of 2O22

¶33

ORDER: perthe Hon'bte the Chief Justice IJjjat Bhuyan)

¶34

Heard Mr. Lakshmi Kanth, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. T.Srikanth Reddy, learned Governrnent Pleader for Revenue appearing for respondents No.1 to 3.

¶35

2- The present writ petition has been frled under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for quashing of communication dated 24.09.2a22 of the Tahsildar, Sangareddy Mandal addressed to the District collector, Sangareddy.

¶36

3- From a perusal of the above communication it is seen that as part of recovery process under the Secu ritization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2OO2 (briefly,^.the SARFAESI Act,) initiated by respondent No.4 Canara Bank, physical possession of the schedule property of M/s. Shreshta lndustries Private Limited i.e., MBR Garden Function Hall

: ::j

ll l l I i I l i

: i li I l.' ll ll;l,!

¶41

consisting of office building (GF+pp1 & AC sheet sheds construrcted on land admeasuring 2662 square yards in Survey No.159/B situated at Pothiredypally Village and Gram Panchayat, Sangareddy Mandal, was taken over and handed over to the authorised officer of respondent No.4.

¶42

4- Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is the owner of the MBR Garden Function HaIl. Petitioner is neither the borrower nor the guarantor. .^{Therefore,attachmentof MBR Garden Function} Hall is not justified. It may be put up for auction at any time.

¶43

On going through the writ afhdavit, we find that in paragraph 5 thereof petitioner has mentioned that loan was obtained from respondent No.4 by M/s. Shreshta Industries Private Limited, Jubilee Hills, Hyderabad. The said M/s. Shreshta [ndustries Private Limited has not been arrayed as a respondent in the present proceedings. In the said paragraph it is stated that possession has been taken under Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act. In paragraph 6 it is stated that elder brother of the petitioner - Manne Balraj, is one of the guarantors o[ M/s. Shreshta Industries

t t I I 1

f Et

itl

ii il ,l 'i 1 .l l 'l t' !;

¶49

¶50

Private Limited and he had executed memorandum of deposit of title deeds. In paragraph 16 of the writ afhdavit it is stated that petitioner had filed a petition under section 14(1) of the SARFAESI Act before the District Collector on 26.09.2022 with the prayer not to proceed against the property of the petitioner. District Collector had issued notice on Ol.lO.2O22. The proceedings are pending. In the entire afhdavit nothing has been stated as to whether M/s. Shreshta Industries Private Limited has filed any original application before the competent Debts Recovery Tribunal under Section 17 of the SARFAESI Act. As a matter of fact, petitioner has already filed objection under Section L4 of the SARFAESI Act which is stated to be pending before respondent No.2. Petitioner also has the option of invoking jurisdiction of the competent Debts Recovery Tribunal under Section LT of the SARFAESI Act.

¶51

Whether the attached property belongs to the petitioner or is a secured asset cannot be gone into in a proceeding under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

¶52

¶53

i lr I t: I

¶54

lll ll I l, lll lt :1

¶55

q z li

¶56

That being the position and having regard to the fact that full details have not been furnished by the petitioner, we are not inclined to entertain the writ petition.

¶57