Disposed

Chittimalla Veerabrahma Chary, v. The Government of India

Telangana HC21 Aug 2024WP/10698/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition challenging a possession notice under the SARFAESI Act, the Telangana High Court disposed of the matter by permitting the petitioner to submit a representation seeking foreclosure of the loan account by waiving interest on balance instalments, directing respondents to examine it.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner permitted to submit representation seeking foreclosure of loan account by waiving interest on balance instalments; respondents directed to examine and pass appropriate orders.

Chittimalla Veerabrahma Chary, Vs The Government of… — Banking and Recovery | Telangana HC (2024)

¶1

[^32e6 I

¶2

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

¶3

WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTY FIRST DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. BHASKAR REDDY

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO: 10698 OF 2024

¶7

Between:

¶8

Chittimalla Veerabrahma Chary, S/o. Ch. Rangaiah,^{Ageabout 49 years,Occ.} Business. R/o. H. No-34-7 421 N 1', New Raipura,^{HanumakondaTown, Hanumakonda} District

¶9

...PETITIONER

¶10

AND

¶11

1 The Government of lndia, Rep. by its secretary^{Ministryof Finance 3rd floor} Jeevan Deep Building, Sansad Marg, New Delhi,^{Delhi 'l 10001}

¶12

2 The Branch Manager, Aadhar Housing Finance^{Limited,Branch Office at #} 17,18 and 19, GMR and GS Complex, 2nd^{floor, Opp. Police Head Quarters,} Sikhadi, Hanumakonda^-506001. T.S.

¶13

3 The Zonal Manager, Aadhar Housing Finance^{Limited,Zonal Office at 2nd} Floor, No.3 JVT iowers, Bth'A'MainRoad,^{Sampangiram Nagar, Bangalore-} 560 027, Karnataka

¶14

4 The Unit Head Manager, Aadhar Housing Finance^{Limited, Corporate Office,} Unit No.B02, Natraj Rustomjee, Western^{Express Highwayand M.V. Road,} Andhcri (East) Mumbai - 400069.

¶15

...RESPONDENTS

¶16

Petition under Article 226 of the^{Constitutionof lndia prayingthat in the} circumstances stated in the affidavit^{filedtherewith, the High Court may be} pleased to issue writ Order or Direction more^particularly oneⁱⁿ the^{nature of Writ} of Mandamus declare the^{impugned possession notice dated20-3-2024 issuedby} the 2nd respondent informing that they^{have taken symbolic possession of the} schedule^property no.1'1-25-858^{Fl.no.11-25-858New RaipuraHanamkonda} Warangal -506011 bounded by^{east plot of DayanandWest road plot of K'}

¶17

¶18

Rajamouri south plot of p.oderu of the petitioner is i,egar arbitrary, marafide intention and vioration of Articre 21 0f the constitution of rndia consequenry setaside the same and direct the respondents no.2 to 4 to corect the g6 insta'ments from the date of the commencement of the loan i e , 31-3-201g to 303-2026 from the petitioner and ailow the petitioner to forecrosure of the roan account no.20 5446 (allotted customer lD.O4 O 1 652Z ).

¶19

IAN O: 't OF 2024

¶20

petition under section 'r51 cpc praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit fired in support of the petition, the High court may be preased to stay the impugned possession notice dated 20-3-2024 rssued by the 2nd respondent pending disposal of the above writ petition.

¶21

Counset for the petitioner: SRI G. ALLABAKASH

¶22

Counsel for the Respondent NoJ: SRI GADI PRAVEEN KUMAR, DEpuTy soltclToR cenEialbr f.rora

¶23

Counsel for the Respondent No.2: Dr. SHAIK FAHEEMULLAH Counsel for the Respondent Nos.3 & 4: _

¶24

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶25

¶26

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE^C. V.^BHASKARREDDY

¶27

WRIT PETITION No.1O698 of 2024

¶28

ORDER:

¶29

This writ petition has been filed seeking^{to declare the} impugned possession notice dated^{20.O3.2024issuedby} respondent No.2 taking symbolic^{possession of the schedule} property bearing H.No. 11-25-858,^New Raipura,^Hanamkonda, Warangal, bounded by east^{plot of Dayanand, West plot of K.} Rajamouli, South plot of P. Odelu,^{of the petitioner as illegal,} arbitrary and violative of Article^{21 of the Constitutionof India} and to consequently set aside the^{same and direct respondent} Nos.2 to 4 to collect 96^{instalmentsfrom the date of} commencement of the loan^{i.e., 31.O3.2018 to 30-O3.2026from} the petitioner and allow^{him to foreclosethe loan account} No,205446 (allotted customer^{ID:040 16527}.} 2. The petitioner states that he^{is a goldsmithby profession} at Yadavanagar of Hanumakonda^{Townand District. It is the} case of the petitioner that^{for the purposeof his business,he} obtained loan amounting to^{Rs.12,76,5221-,wttll floating} interest @ 17.l5o/o per annum,^{vide loan accountNo.205446} from respondent No.2, repayable^{in 96 monthly instalments'by}

¶30

¶31

mortgaging House bearing No.3-4-742/A/ I in open plot admeasuring 1O1.OO square yards in Survey No.l-244/8, situated at New Rayapura, Hanumakonda, and ever since then he has been regularly paying the EMIs in terms of the loan agreement. It is the further case of the petitioner that even though he paid a sum of Rs.L2,48,644/- till 30. 11.2023, respondent No.2, without adjusting the same and without even furnishing a copy of the loan agreement, insisted him to pay an amount of Rs. 1 1,87 ,399 /- towards future principa-l outstanding liability, which constrained him to approach the Civil Court by Iiling O.S.No.l286 of 2023 on the Iile of Special Judicial Magistrate of First Class (Mobile) under pCR Act-cum_Il Additional Junior Civil Judge, Hanumakonda, for foreclosure of loan and redemption of mortgage propert5r and the Court below granted ad interim injunction in his favour. 3. The grievance of the petitioner is that despite the same, respondent No.2 has issued notice dated O9.O1.2O24 under Section 13(2) of the Securitization and Reconstruction of financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2022 (for short the "SARFAESI Act") thereby insisting him to pay an amount of Rs. 12,99,032/- within 60 days from the date of *v

I I

receipt of the notice, which^{constrained him to approach} respondent No.2 with a request^{to allow him to foreclose the} loan account, by paying the balance^{loan amount, as he has} already paid the substantial^{arnount, but withoutconsidering} the said request,^{respondentNo.2 issued the impugned} possession notice dated 20.O3.2O24^{underSection13(4) of the} Act informing that it has^{taken possessionof the subject} property.

¶36

Considered the submissions^{made by the learned counsel} for the parties ald^{perused the record.}

¶37

Since it is the case of the^{petitioner that he has paid the} substantial loan amount^{borrowedby him vide loan account} No.205446 to respondent^{No.2, and he is ready and willingto} foreclose the loan account^{by clearingthe balance loan amount,} this Court deems it appropriate^{to disposeof the writ petition} by permitting the^{petitioner to submit a representationon the} file of respondent No.2^{seeking foreclosure of his loan account} by waiving ihterest^{payable on the balance instalments' On} filing such representation,^{the respondentsare directedto} examine the same and^{pass appropriate orders, in accordance} with law.

¶38

¶39

The writ petition is accordingty disposed of.

¶40

As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions, if aly,

¶41

pending shall stand closed. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶42

¶43

SD/- V. KA THA ASSISTANT R GI RAR //TRUE COPY// SECTION FICER

¶44

To,

¶45

The Secretary, Ministry of Finance, Government^{of lndia, 3rd floor Jeevan} Deep Building, Sansad Marg, New Delhi, Delhi¹¹⁰⁰⁰¹

¶46

The Branch Manager, Aadhar Housing^{FinanceLimited, Branch Office at #} 17,18 and 19, GMR and GS Complex.2ndfloor,^{Opp. Police Head Quarters,} Sikhadi, Hanumakonda - 506001. T.S.

¶47

The Zonal Manager, Aadhar Housing^{Finance Limited.Zonal Officeal 2nd} Floor, No.3 JVT iowers, B'h'A'Main Road. Sampangiram^{Nagar.Bangalore-} 560 027, Karnataka

¶48

The Unit Head Manager, Aadhar Housing^{Finance Limited, CorporateOffice,} Unit No.802, Natraj Rustomjee, Western^{ExpressHighway and M.V. Road,} Andhcri (East) Mumbai - 400069.

¶49

One CC to SRI G. ALLABAKASH, Advocate [OPUC]

¶50

One CC to SRI GADI PRAVEEN KUMAR,^{Deputy Solicitor Generalof lndia} loPUCl

¶51

One CC to Dr. SHAIK FAHEEMULLAH,^Advocate [OPUC]

¶52

B. Two CD Copies

t,S I

I / /

HIGH COURT

DATED:2110812024

,,r:;,. ----.--.-i s, ,,i...,
' ,)^i
a,, -.'
o
lt -
ll.)
ORDER

¶59

WP.No.10698 of 2024

¶60

DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION

¶61

WITHOUT COSTS

¶62

:.9
[oJG('W

Chittimalla Veerabrahma Chary, v. The Government of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Chittimalla Veerabrahma Chary, v. The Government of India

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

Buchi Reddy Vs Sri Rahul Bojja

M.Sekhar Yadav Vs Sri. Rahul Bojja IAS

Ramudu Vs Sri. Rahul Bojjale

Smt. Maddi Padmaja, Vs The State of Telangana

Mohammed Azgher Hussain Vs STate of Telanga.

Sri Krishna Sai Apartment Owners Association Vs The Bank of Baroda