WP/40789/2014 of Koyi Kishore Babu Vs The Authorized Officer, Syndicate Bank, on 31 December 2014

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANUANDTHE HON’BLE MRS JUSTICE ANIS

WRIT PETITION No.40789 OF 2014

ORDER:- (per Hon’ble Sri Justice K.C.Bhanu)

This writ petition is filed seeking to issue a Writ of Mandamusdeclaring the action of respondent Nos.1 and 2 in refusing to receivefrom the petitioners the decretal amount covered by the decree inO.S.No.47 of 1990 on the file of the Principal Senior Civil Judge,Tenali in spite of the representation, dated 01.12.2014, as illegal,arbitrary and contrary to the provisions of the Securitization andReconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of SecurityInterest Act, 2002 (for short, “the SARFAESI Act”), and consequently,to direct respondent Nos.1 and 2 to receive the decretal amount due ason date with interest and costs covered by the said decree from thepetitioners and record full satisfaction of the decree.

2. It is stated in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition thatpetitioner No.1 is the absolute owner and possessor of property to anextent of Ac.2.25 cents out of Ac.3.68 cents covered by D.No.254 ofAngalakuduru Village of Tenali Mandal, Guntur District havingpurchased the same under a registered sale deed, dated 12.04.1993,from its rightful owner – Mannava Tirupatamma, the mother ofrespondent No.3. Petitioner No.1 conveyed an extent of Ac.1.00 centsof land out of his purchased property in the name of petitioner No.2,who is none other than his sister, out of love and affection under aregistered gift deed, dated 24.03.2006, and put her in possession ofthe same. Ever since the said gift, petitioner No.2 has been inexclusive possession and enjoyment of her Ac.1.00 cents and theremaining extent of Ac.1.25 cents is in possession and enjoyment ofpetitioner No.1. While so, a suit in O.S.No.47 of 1990 on the file of thePrincipal Senior Civil Judge, Tenali was filed by respondent No.2 for recovery of amount due under a mortgage said to have been createdby respondent No.3 for the above property and the same was decreedon 13.11.2006 in favour of respondent No.2 Bank. Respondent No.3has no right, title or interest in the said property, but created anequitable mortgage in favour of respondent No.2 and obtained loan forM/s.Vivek Vardhini Ice Industries, being its Proprietor. RespondentNo.2 filed E.P.No.150 of 2007 in O.S.No.47 of 1990 on the file of thePrincipal Senior Civil Judge, Tenali for realisation of the decretalamount by way of sale of the property purchased by the petitioners. The petitioners filed E.A.No.205 of 2010 in the said Execution Petitionclaiming that the said property belongs to them and sought fordeclaration that respondent No.3 has no right or title over the saidproperty and the same are pending. Respondent No.2 invoked theprovisions under the SARFAESI Act and respondent No.1 gotpublished a sale publication notice on 03.11.2014 in Eenadu TeluguDaily, Guntur Edition wherein it is mentioned that an amount ofRs.13,38,421/- with interest and costs was due and the property isbeing brought to sale. Respondent Nos.1 and 2 did not issue anynotice contemplated under Section 13(2) or 13(4) of the SARFAESIAct. The petitioners made a representation, dated 01.12.2014, seekingpermission to deposit the amount due but in vain. Hence, thepetitioners filed the present writ petition.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioners stated that the petitioners areready to pay the entire amount due to the respondent Bank if fourweeks’ time is granted to them.

4. On the other hand, learned Standing Counsel appearing for therespondent Bank opposed the same and prays to dismiss the writpetition.

5. The respondent Bank is interested only to recover the entireamount due. As the petitioners came forward to discharge the entireoutstanding amount to the bank, reasonable time can be granted to

enable the petitioners to pay the entire amount due to the Bank. Therefore, we direct the petitioners to pay the entire due amount to theBank within a period of four (4) weeks from the date of receipt of a copyof this order. Till then, no further proceedings under the SARFAESIAct shall be taken up by the Bank. If the above condition is notcomplied with by the petitioners, the respondent Bank is at liberty toproceed further for realisation of the amount due to the Bank inaccordance with the provisions under the SARFAESI Act. Registry isdirected not to entertain any application seeking “Extension of Time” or“For being mentioned” in this regard.

6. With the above direction, the Writ Petition is disposed of. Thereshall be no order as to costs. Miscellaneous Petitions, if any, pendingin this Writ Petition shall stand closed.

______________________

JUSTICE K.C.BHANU

_______________

JUSTICE ANISDate: 31.12.2014AMD

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU

AND

THE HON’BLE MRS JUSTICE ANIS

WRIT PETITION No.40789 OF 2014

DATE: 31.12.2014

AMD