Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
P.J.S. Ravi Raju, vs The State Bank Of India, on 19 August, 2025
APHC010279912025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
AT AMARAVATI [3459]
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
TUESDAY,THE NINETEENTH DAY OF AUGUST
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE SUMATHI JAGADAM
WRIT PETITION NO: 14126/2025
Between:
1. P.J.S. RAVI RAJU,, S/O LATE SAMUEL RAJU, AGED 60 YEARS,
R/O. D.NO.36-95-103/3, KAPPARADA, KANCHARAPALEM,
VISAKHAPATNAM - 530008
...PETITIONER
AND
1. THE STATE BANK OF INDIA, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF
GENERAL MANAGER, RACPC BRANCH, ZONAL OFFICE
COMPLEX, BALAJI NAGAR, SIRIPURAM, VISAKHAPATNAM,
VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT.
2. THE ASSISTANT GENERAL MANAGER, STATE BANK OF INDIA,
RACPC BRANCH, ZONAL OFFICE COMPLEX, BALAJI NAGAR,
SIRIPURAM, VISAKHAPATNAM, VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT.
3. THE ASSISTANT GENERAL MANAGER, STATE BANK OF INDIA,
RACPC-I, DONDAPARTHY BRANCH, VISAKHAPATNAM
VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT.
...RESPONDENT(S):
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
2
JS,J
W.P.No.14126 of 2025
in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the
respondents No.1 and 2 in not releasing the original title deeds of the
petitioner's property deposited through a Memorandum of Deposit of title
deeds vide Document No.90/2023 dt. 05.01.2023 on the file of SRO,
Pendurthi, Visakhapatnam, despite the total repayment and closure of
the Housing Loan Account No 41561773704 in view of the letter
dt.21.05.2025 issued by the 3rd respondent as illegal, arbitrary,
unconstitutional, violative of Article 14, 21 and 300-A of the Constitution
of India, consequently direct the respondents No.1 and 2 to release the
original title deeds of the petitioner's property, an extent of 41.48 sq.
yards together with third floor bearing Flat.No.403, including common
areas and balconies and car parking 100 Sft in Stilt Floor of Sai Dhatri
Residency, situated within the limits Bheemunipatnam Sub-Registrar,
Visakhapatnam District
IA 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 direct the respondents herein to release the original title
deeds of the petitioner's property, an extent of 41.48 sq. yards together
with third floor bearing Flat.No.403, including common areas and
balconies and car parking 100 Sft in Stilt Floor of "Sai Dhatri Residency",
situated within the limits Bheemunipatnam Sub-Registrar,
Visakhapatnam District, pending disposal of the above writ petition
Counsel for the Petitioner:
1. V VINOD K REDDY
Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1.
2. VENKATA RAMA RAO KOTA
This Court made the following:
3
JS,J
W.P.No.14126 of 2025
ORDER:
The sister of the petitioner purchased Flat No.403 of Sai Dhatri Residency, located in Kranthi Nagar, Chinamushidiwada village, Visakhapatnam, through a registered sale deed, document No.89 of 2023, dated 05.01.2023, and obtained a home loan from the 3rd respondent bank for Rs.28.00 lakhs by depositing the original sale deeds with the bank.
2. On 18.01.2023, the deceased executed a Will in favour of the petitioner and nominated him to receive the insurance proceeds and other death benefits. She passed away on 31.05.2023. Thereafter, the petitioner repaid a significant portion of the loan amount on 28.11.2023 and approached the bank to release the documents after receiving the remaining balance. The 3rd respondent bank then informed the petitioner that a third party, namely, S. Joseph, is claiming rights over the subject property and advised the petitioner to obtain an order from the competent civil Court.
3. The petitioner has filed O.S.No.77 of 2024 for a declaration to restrain the respondent (defendant) and his men from interfering with the peaceful possession of the property. In this suit, the respondent (S. 4 JS,J W.P.No.14126 of 2025 Joseph) remained ex parte, and the Court passed a decree in favour of the petitioner on 10.05.2024. Subsequently, the petitioner approached the respondent bank to release the original title deeds. Since the respondents have failed to release them, the petitioner has filed this writ petition before the Court.
4. In the counter affidavit filed by the respondents, they have not denied payment of the entire loan amount by the petitioner. It is submitted that there is a conflicting claim between the petitioner and Sri S. Joseph. After decreeing the suit, Sri S. Joseph filed an interlocutory application to set aside the ex parte decree. Additionally, he issued legal notices on 22.05.2025 and 07.06.2025 requesting the respondent bank not to release the documents in favour of the petitioner. They further submit that the petitioner has not impleaded/made S. Joseph, who is a defendant in the suit, as a necessary party in the present writ petition. Since the petitioner and Sri S. Joseph are having rival claim over the subject property, the documents will be released as per the orders passed by the civil Court, and they pray for the dismissal of the writ petition due to the non-joinder of a necessary party.
5
JS,J W.P.No.14126 of 2025
5. On perusal of the record, it is evident that the sister of the petitioner executed a Will on 18.01.2023 in favor of the petitioner. It is not in dispute that the petitioner has not repaid the entire loan amount to the 3rd respondent bank. The husband of the petitioner's sister predeceased her, and she has no children. She used to stay with the petitioner until her death. It is also not in dispute that the petitioner filed O.S.No.77 of 2024 in the Court of the I Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division), Visakhapatnam, and the suit was decreed in favour of the petitioner, restraining the defendant from interfering with the possession of the property. Since Sri S. Joseph claims to be the Class-l legal heir of the petitioner's sister, and the application to set aside the ex parte decree is pending before the trial Court, and it is the specific case of the 2nd respondent-Bank that since the petitioner and Sri S. Joseph are having rival claim over the subject property, the documents will be released as per the orders passed by the civil Court.
6. Since there is a dispute with regard to the title of the subject property in between the petitioner and Sri S. Joseph and the applications filed by the latter before the trial Court are still pending for consideration as on today and since the petitioner has not made Sri S.Joseph, who is defendant in the suit, as a party to the present writ petition, this Court 6 JS,J W.P.No.14126 of 2025 feels it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition by directing the respondent bank to take appropriate steps, subject to the outcome of the pending applications before the trial Court.
7. With the above direction, the Writ Petition is disposed of. No order as to costs.
Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this appeal shall stand closed.
_________________________________ JUSTICE SUMATHI JAGADAM th 19 August, 2025 cbs 7 JS,J W.P.No.14126 of 2025 THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE SUMATHI JAGADAM WRIT PETITION No.14126 of 2025 19th August, 2025 cbs