Andhra Pradesh High Court
WP/798/2026 of ARIKATLA KISHORE CHOWDARY Vs UNION OF INDIA on 27 January 2026
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH WEDNESDAY, TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE CHEEKATI MANAVENDRANATH ROY THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TUHIN KUMAR GEDELA WRIT PETITION NO: 798/2026 Between: 1. ARIKATLA KISHORE CHOWDARY, S/O LATE RAJAGOPAL RAO, AGE 45 YEARS, D.NO.3 CAMP-1 KOWTHALAM,
APHC010010052026
IN TH
WEDNESDAY,
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. ARIKATLA KISHOR AGE 45 YEARS, CAMP-1 KOWTHA
1. UNION OF INDIA, R UNION BANK B NARIMAN POINT, M
2. UNION BANK OF FOURTH FLOOR, KURNOOL-518 002
3. UNION BANK OF MUNICIPAL OFFIC
4. UNION BANK OF ADONI BRANCH, K Petition under Articl circumstances stated in pleased to issue a writ nature of WRIT OF MAN E HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRAD AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) THE TWENTY EIGHTH DAY OF JAN O THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT RI JUSTICE CHEEKATI MANAVEND BLE SRI JUSTICE TUHIN KUMAR G WRIT PETITION NO: 798/2026 RE CHOWDARY, S/O LATE RAJA D.NO.3-43, SURVEY NO.50, KU ALAM, KURNOOL DISTRICT. A.P. AND REP. BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTO BHAVAN, NO.239, VIDHAN BHA MUMBAI-400 021. MAHARASHTRA S F INDIA, REP. BY ITS REGIONA K.S. ICON SHOPPEL, BIRLA
INDIA, REP. BY ITS BRANCH MA E ADONI, KURNOOL DISTRICT. A.P INDIA, REP. BY ITS AUTHORIS KURNOOL DISTRICT. A.P. ...RES le 226 of the Constitution of India pra the affidavit filed therewith, the High or order or direction, more particula NDAMUS, declaring the high handed a DESH
NUARY DRANATH ROY GEDELA AGOPAL RAO, UMBALANURU ...PETITIONER R AND C.E.O., AVAN MARG, STATE AL MANAGER, COMPOUND, ANAGER, OPP P. SED OFFICER, SPONDENT(S): aying that in the h Court may be arly one in the action of the 3rd
CMR,J & GTK,J W.P.No.798 of 2026
respondent in mishandling the petitioner's Account No.000230100036145 and put for sale of the amount by impugned sale notice of the 4th respondent dated 30.12.2025 by non-mentioning the pending cases status and drastically reducing the value of the property, with a malafide intention to accommodate her near and dear, which is contrary to the procedure and highly objectionable, without jurisdiction, which is violation of Article 14 and 300- Aofthe Constitution of India, consequently set aside the same in the interest of justice. 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 grant stay of all further proceedings in pursuance of the proceedings the Notice in Ref.No.B/32/2025, dated 18.12.2025 issued by the respondent No.4, pending disposal of the above Writ Petition and pass IA NO: 2 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 May be pleased to advance the Writ petition from 12.02.2026 to 22.01.2026, since the Auction of the petitioner’s residential house is fixed by the respondents Bank on 28.01.2026 in the interest of justice. Counsel for the Petitioner:
1. KURITI BHASKARA RAO Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1. CMR,J & GTK,J W.P.No.798 of 2026
The Court made the following: ORDER: (Per Hon’ble Sri Justice Cheekati Manavendranath Roy)
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Nooka Jagannadham, learned counsel for the respondents.
2. Challenging the measures initiated by the Bank, for recovery of the loan amount from the petitioner, who is the principal borrower, the petitioner has already approached the Debts Recovery Tribunal seeking redressal of his grievance. It appears the said securitization application filed before the Debts Recovery Tribunal was dismissed and thereafter, the petitioner has also preferred an appeal before the Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal. However, without pursuing his remedy before the appellate authority, the petitioner has approached this Court by way of filing the writ petition.
3. In the said facts and circumstances of the case, as the petitioner has already approached the appellate authority, we are not inclined to interfere in the matter and to entertain the writ petition.
4. Therefore, the Writ Petition is disposed of with a direction to the petitioner to pursue his remedy before the appellate authority where the appeal preferred by the petitioner is pending. 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: 28.01.2026 MDP