WP/3111/2026 of THOTA PUNDARIKAKSHULU Vs THE AUTHORIZED OFFICER on 3 February 2026

1. THOTA PUNDAR ABOUT 52 YEA RAMACHANDRAPU 533262.

2. SMT. THOTA SHAN 27, VENKATAYAP GODAVARI DISTRI

1. THE AUTHORIZED Management Bran Visakhapatnam Petition under Articl circumstances stated in pleased to issue an app particularly in the nat Respondent/Bank and t causing any further hara until the disposal of the Honourable DRT, Visakh E HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRAD AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) AY, THE FOURTH DAY OF FEBRUA O THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT RI JUSTICE CHEEKATI MANAVEND BLE SRI JUSTICE TUHIN KUMAR G RIT PETITION NO: 3111/2026 RIKAKSHULU, S/O. SATYANARAY RS, R/O D. NO. 4-27, VENKA URAM MANDAL, EAST GODAVAR NTHA DEVI, , W/O. PUNDARIKAKSH ALEM, RAMACHANDRAPURAM M ICT - 533262 ...P AND D OFFICER, Indian Overseas Bank, A nch, D.No. 48-14-111, Sri Nit ...R le 226 of the Constitution of India pra the affidavit filed therewith, the High propriate Writ order of stay or directio ture of Writ of Mandamus from their interested parties from taking assment, torture and mental agony with e lA No. 150 /2026 in S.A. No. 33 apatnam as well as the Honourable co DESH

RY DRANATH ROY GEDELA YANA, AGED ATAYAPALEM, RI DISTRICT - HULU, D.NO. 4- MANDAL EAST PETITIONER(S) Asset Recovery hya complex, RESPONDENT aying that in the h Court may be on of status quo refraining the any action or h to their threats 3 / 2026 in the ourt 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 issue an interim order to stay all further proceedings of the respondent/Bank and other interested parties connecting with the auction, proposed on 06-02- 2026 and the Honourable Court to pass Counsel for the Petitioner(S):

1. MOHAMMAD UMAR Counsel for the Respondent:

1. The Court made the following: ORDER: (Per Hon’ble Sri Justice Cheekati Manavendranath Roy)

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners.

2. Challenging the measures initiated by the respondent-Bank, for realization of the loan amount payable by the petitioners, the petitioners have filed this writ petition.

3. As can be seen from the writ petition, it is evident that the petitioners have already approached the Debts Recovery Tribunal, which is the appropriate forum constituted under the special enactment with special mechanism for redressal of the grievances relating to the measures initiated under the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002. The petitioners have filed securitization application No.33 of 2026 before the Debts Recovery Tribunal and the same is pending adjudication before the Debts Recovery Tribunal. They have also filed an interlocutory application along with the said securitization application seeking interim relief. Therefore, as they have already approached the Tribunal for redressal of their grievance, we are not inclined to interfere in the matter and to entertain this writ petition. The petitioners have to pursue their remedy before the Tribunal where their application is pending adjudication. They cannot maintain parallel proceedings before this Court and the Tribunal relating to the same grievance.

4. Therefore, the Writ Petition is disposed of with a direction to the petitioners to pursue their remedy before the Tribunal where their securitization application is pending adjudication. 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: 04.02.2026 MDP