Andhra Pradesh High Court
WP/6135/2026 of VEERARAJU GURRAM Vs THE IIFL HOME FINANCE LIMITED on 2 March 2026
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH TUESDAY, TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE CHEEKATI MANAVENDRANATH ROY THE HONOURABLE SRI WRIT PETITION NO: 6135/2026 Between: 1. VEERARAJU GURRAM, S/O. NAGARAJU GURRAM AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS, OCC AGRICULTURE, R/O.D.NO.1 VEEDHI, YELESWARAM, EAST
APHC010113362026
IN TH
TUESD
TWO
THE HONOURABLE SR
THE HONOURAB
W
Between:
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.
1. VEERARAJU GUR 58 YEARS, OCC A VEEDHI, YELESW KAKINADA DISTRIC
1. THE IIFL HOME F OFFICER, SRI D. ABOUT 45 YEARS HOUSING FINANC SBH, T. NAGAR, DISTRICT - 533101
2. THE UNION OF IN NORTH BLOCK, NE Petition under Articl circumstances stated in pleased to issue a writ or of Writ of Mandamus ch 2025 on the file of the C at Rajamahendravaram a E HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRAD AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) DAY, THE THIRD DAY OF MARCH O THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT RI JUSTICE CHEEKATI MANAVEND BLE SRI JUSTICE TUHIN KUMAR G RIT PETITION NO: 6135/2026 RAM, S/O. NAGARAJU GURRAM AGRICULTURE, R/O.D.NO.1-127, M ARAM, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT CT - 533429. AND FINANCE LIMITED, REP. BY ITS BALAJI SINGH NAIK, S/O. DMS. . REGIONAL LEGAL MANAGER, IN CE LTD., D.NO.6-6-10, GS RAO CO RAJAMAHENDRAVARAM, EAS . DIA, FINANCE DEPARTMENT, ROO EW DELHI REP. BY ITS SECRETAR ...RES le 226 of the Constitution of India pra the affidavit filed therewith, the High r direction or order, more particularly o hallenging Order dated 16.01.2026 in Chief Judicial Magistrate Court, East G and consequential warrants issued to DESH
DRANATH ROY GEDELA AGED ABOUT MANGULAVARI , PRESENTLY ...PETITIONER AUTHORIZED NAIK, AGED NDIA INFOLINE OMPLEX, OPP. ST GODAVARI OM NO. 129-A, RY - 110001. SPONDENT(S): aying that in the h Court may be one in the nature n Crl.MP.624 of Godavari District secure physical
CMR,J & GTK,J W.P.No.6135 of 2026
possession of scheduled property in the notice Under Section 14 of Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security, Interest Act 2002 obtained by the respondent Financial Institution in pursuant of possession notice dated 09.10.2025 issued by the 1st respondent herein under Securitization and Reconstruction of Finance Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest (SARFAESI) Act, 2002 is illegal, arbitrary and violative of principles of natural justice and pass IA NO: 1 OF 2026 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 suspend the Order dated 16.01.2026 in Crl.MP.624 of 2025 on the file of the Chief Judicial Magistrate Court, East Godavari District at Rajamahendravaram and consequential warrants issued to secure physical possession of scheduled property in the notice Under Section 14 of Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security, Interest Act 2002 obtained by the respondent institution, pending disposal of the writ petition and pass Counsel for the Petitioner:
1. M K RAJ KUMAR Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1. CMR,J & GTK,J W.P.No.6135 of 2026
The Court made the following: ORDER: (Per Hon’ble Sri Justice Cheekati Manavendranath Roy)
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner.
2. Challenging the order dated 16.01.2026 passed in Crl.M.P.No.624 of 2025 on the file of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, East Godavari District, whereby an order under Section 14 of the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002, was passed to take possession of the secured asset, the instant writ petition has been filed by the petitioner, who is the borrower.
3. The petitioner has got an efficacious remedy of challenging the said order, if at all he is aggrieved by any valid legal ground, before the Debts Recovery Tribunal, which is constituted under the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993, with special mechanism for redressal of such grievances. But, without approaching the Tribunal, the petitioner has invoked writ jurisdiction of this Court.
4. Therefore, the Writ Petition is disposed of with a direction to the petitioner to approach the Debts Recovery Tribunal, seeking redressal of his grievance. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, Interlocutory Applications pending, if any, shall stand closed.
________________________________________ JUSTICE CHEEKATI MANAVENDRANATH ROY
_____________________________ JUSTICE TUHIN KUMAR GEDELA
Date: 03.03.2026 MDP