Telangana High Court
WA/1657/2014 of M. Suryanarayana Rao, Vs A.P. State Warehousing Corporation on 30 December 2014
COURT OF JUDICATURE AT HYDERABAD FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AND THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH THE HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI KALYAN JYOTI SENGUPTA AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR WRIT APPEAL No. 1657 of 2014 Date: 30.12.2014 Between: M. Suryanarayana Rao & others.
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT HYDERABADFOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AND THE STATE OF ANDHRAPRADESH
THE HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI KALYAN JYOTI SENGUPTA AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR
WRIT APPEAL No. 1657 of 2014
Date: 30.12.2014
Between:
M. Suryanarayana Rao& others.
… Appellants
And
A.P. State Warehousing Corporation,Hyderabad & others.
… Respondents
This Court made the following:
THE HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI KALYAN JYOTI SENGUPTAANDTHE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR
WRIT APPEAL No. 1657 of 2014
JUDGMENT:(Per the Hon’ble the Chief Justice Sri Kalyan Jyoti Sengupta)
After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, namely, theappellants and the parties before the learned Single Judge in the writproceedings, this matter is being disposed of by the proposed judicialsettlement, which has been accepted by all the parties.
It would be open for the appellants to approach the DebtRecovery Tribunal (for short, “the Tribunal”), if not approached, toquestion the auction sale held under the provisions of the Securitizationand Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of SecurityInterest Act, 2002. The writ petitioner – 3[rd] respondent will be free toreceive the amount in terms of the order of the learned Single Judge andthe same must be deposited in a bank account. The bank concernedshall not allow the writ petitioner to withdraw the amount so to bereceived and deposited by it for a period of one month from the date ofreceipt of a copy of this order. In the event, no challenge is made withinone month as above by the appellants then the writ petitioner will be freeto withdraw the amount and order of injunction will stand vacatedautomatically. Of course, this order by consensus will not be a bindingand influencing factor before the learned Tribunal. All parties are free toapproach the learned Tribunal, if so advised.
Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. Nocosts.
Date: 30.12.2014ES
___________________K.J. SENGUPTA, CJ
___________________SANJAY KUMAR, J