Andhra Pradesh High Court
WP/1713/2010 of Chitturi Krishna Kumari, Vs Andhra Pradesh Industrial Development, on 24 February 2026
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3209] WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTY FIFTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA WRIT PETITION NO: 1713/2010 Between: 1. CHITTURI KRISHNA KUMARI,, W/O. SURYA VENKATA
APHC010336482010
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA
PRADESH
AT AMARAVATI
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
WEDNESDAY,THE TWENTY FIFTH DAY OF FEBRUARY
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA
WRIT PETITION NO: 1713/2010
Between:
1. CHITTURI KRISHNA KUMARI,, W/O. SURYA VENKATA
MADHUSUDHANA RAO, HOUSE WIFE, R/O. F.NO. 202, H.NO. 22-19-18(12), INDRALOK AVENUE APARTMENT, RASHTRAPATHI ROAD, TANUKU, WEST GODAVARI
DISTRICT.
...PETITIONER
AND
1. ANDHRA
PRADESH
INDUSTRIAL
DEVELOPMENT,
CORPORATION LIMITED, PARISRAMA BHAVAN, FATEH
MAIDAN
ROAD,
HYDERABAD,
REP.
BY
ITS
CHAIRMAN/MANAGING DIRECTOR.
2. ANDHRA
PRADESH
INDUSTRIAL
DEVELOPMENT,
CORPORATION LIMITED, PARISRAMA BHAVAN, FATEH
MAIDAN ROAD, HYDERABAD, REP. BY ITS TAHSILDAR
ON DEPUTATION
3. ANDHRA
PRADESH
INDUSTRIAL
DEVELOPMENT,
CORPORATION LIMITED, PARISRAMA BHAVAN, FATEH
MAIDAN ROAD, HYDERABAD, REP. BY ITS RECOVERY
OFFICER.
NJS,J
W.P.NO.1713 OF 2010
...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 toissue writ, order or direction, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in attaching the house hold items (5
articles) as per the order dt. 20-01-2010 of the 3rd respondent as illegal, arbitrary and violation of principles of natural justice consequently directing the respondents to drop further proceedings with destrain ordes IA NO: 1 OF 2010(WPMP 2319 OF 2010
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 grant stay of all further proceedings pursuant to the attachment of household articles vide proceedings dt. 20-01-2010 of 3rd respondent including disposal of the said items Counsel for the Petitioner:
1. T V S PRABHAKARA RAO
Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1. AP INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION
2. B DAMODHAR REDDY
The Court made the following:
NJS,J
W.P.NO.1713 OF 2010
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.
ORDER:-
Heard Mr.P.Sai Avinash, learned counsel representing Mr.T.V.S.Prabhakar Rao, learned counsel for the petitioner.
2. The writ petition is filed seeking to declare the action of the respondents in attaching the household items (5 articles) as per the order dated 20.01.2010 of the 3rd respondent as illegal and arbitrary etc., and for consequential directions.
3. While directing notice before admission, the learned Judge, by an order dated 02.02.2010, granted interim stay for a period of three (3) weeks.
4. As seen from the docket proceedings, it appears that the interim stay has not been extended subsequently.
5. There is no representation on behalf of the respondent/Corporation. Be that as it may, through the impugned order dated 20.01.2010, the 3rd respondent attached the movable articles of the petitioner i.e., Onida Television, Godrej Refrigerator, Symphany Air-Cooler, Dining Table with four chairs and Godrej Almirah,.
NJS,J
W.P.NO.1713 OF 2010
6. Considering the afflux of time and the nature of the attachment, this Court is not inclined to examine the matter, by keeping the writ petition pending, more particularly as there is no representation on behalf of the respondent/Corporation.
7. Accordingly, the writ petition is closed, leaving it open to the parties to file an appropriate application if anything survives for adjudication in this matter. There shall be no order as to costs.
As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall also stand closed. ___________________________ JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA
Date: 25.02.2026 LSP