Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 4, Cited by 0]

Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati

Majeti Venkateswara Rao vs M/S. Union Bank Of India on 3 July, 2025

Author: R. Raghunandan Rao

Bench: R. Raghunandan Rao

 V

Si

      APHC010327552025

                            IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
                                            AT AMARAVATI

                                   (Special Original Jurisdiction)


                         THURSDAY, THE THIRD DAY OF JULY
                            TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

                                         PRESENT


      HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE DHIRAJ SINGH THAKUR, THE CHIEF JUSTICE

                                              AND

                     HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE R RAGHUNANDAN RAO

                            WRIT PETITION NO: 16363 OF 2025

     Between:


            Majeti Venkateswara Rao, S/o. Ramachandrarao Aged about 60 years,
            Occ:    Business, R/o. 2-34, Main Road, Pullalapadu,      Nallajerla, West
            Godavari, Andhra Pradesh - 534112.

                                                                          ...Petitioner

                                              AND


            M/s Union Bank of India, Rep. by its Chief Manager/Authorized Officer,
            Polasanipalli    Branch,   Main    Road   Highway,   Bhimadole Junction,
            Polasanipalli, A.P. - 534425.

                                                                        ...Respondent

           Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India 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 or any other appropriate writ declaring that the action      of

     the advocate commissioner taking the physical possession of the          schedule

     property by affixing the warrant notice dated 29.05.2025 on     the file of Hon'ble

     Chief Judicial Magistrate - Cum - Principal Civil    Judge (Senior Division) at
  Eluru, West Godavari District on the schedule premises without giving notice
due to which the petitioner lost his opportunity to approach appropriate legal
tforum, while keeping perishable goods in the schedule premises as arbitrary,
unlawful, violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India and violative of
principles of fairness, against the fundamental rights guaranteed under the
Constitution of India and consequently set aside the advocate       commissioner

notice dated 29.05.2025 and all other concomitant proceedings.
lA NO: 1 OF 2025


      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
permit the petitioner to take the perishable goods where the respondent bank
has no right to seize as the stock are       not mortgaged to thern and other
required materials from the schedule premises.

lA NO: 2 OF 2025


     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
restore the possession to the petitioner not depriving the Petitioner from eking
out his livelihood.


Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI BONDILI RAVIKIRAN SINGH

Counsel for the Respondent: M/s V DYUMANI

The Court made the following order:
                                                                      Bench Sr.No:-10
APHC010327552025
                   IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH                     [3446]
                                   AT AMARAVATI

      B                WRIT PETITION NO: 16363 of 2025

                                                                          ...Petitioner
Sri Majeti Venkateswara Rao
      Vs.

M/s. Union Bank of India                                             ...Respondent
                                       **********




Advocate for petitioner                     Sri Bondili Ravikiran Singh

Advocate for respondent                     Smt V. Dyumani


            CORAM :THE CHIEF JUSTICE DHIRAJ SINGH THAKUR
                     SRI JUSTICE R. RAGHUNANDAN RAO

            DATE     : 3rd July 2025

 PC:

          Proceedings under the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial
 Assets and Enforcement of Securities Interest Act, 2002 (SARFAESI Act)

 have been challenged by the petitioner.

 2.       The petitioner is already out of possession of the secured asset.         It will


 be open to the petitioner to avail the alternate remedy by way of an appeal
 before the Debts Recovery Tribunal. We do not find any reason to interfere at

 this stage by invoking our extraordinary jurisdiction considering the ratio of the
 judgments rendered by the Apex Court in Radha Krishan Industries v. State
  of H.P./ and United Bank of India vs. Satyawati Tondon^.


  ^ (2021) 6 see 771
  ^[{2010)8 see 110 ; 2010 INSe 428]
                                         2




3.     Accordingly, the Writ Petition is dismissed. No costs.


       Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed.
                                                                Sd/- M. SRINIVAS
                                                         ASSISTANT REGISTRAR
                                //TRUE COPY//

                                                           SECTION OFFICER

To


     1. One CC to Sri. Bondili Ravikiran Singh Advocate [OPUC]
     2. One CC to M/s V Dyumani Advocate [OPUC]
     3. Three CD Copies

GSC
                        ¥

HIGH COURT
DATED:03/07/2025




ORDER

WP NO. 16363 OF 2025 DISMISSING THE WP WITHOUT COSTS