Andhra Pradesh High Court
WP/33748/2025 of CITY UNION BANK Vs The Debt Recovery Tribiunal, on 7 January 2026
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH THURSDAY, TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE CHEEKATI MANAVENDRANATH ROY THE HONOURABLE SRI WRIT PETITION NO: 33748/2025 Between: 1. CITY UNION BANK, REP.BY ITS AUTHORISED OFFICER, SRI. SRINIVASA PRASAD K.K, S/O.NARSIMHA RAO, AGED 54 YEARS, OCC-
APHC010645662025
IN TH
THURSDA
TWO
THE HONOURABLE SR
THE HONOURAB
WR
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. CITY UNION BAN SRINIVASA PRASA OCC- AUTHORIS MANAGEMENT, A KUMBAKONAM, TA
2. THE BRANCH MAN PINNELLI. DATTA AGED 41 YEARS, O VYGRAM ROAD, DISTRICT, PIN 533
1. THE DEBT R REPRESENTED BY
2. JEENU MAHESH B YEARS, OCC BU JAGGAMPETA, EA Petition under Articl circumstances stated in pleased to issue a writ or E HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRAD AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) AY, THE EIGHTH DAY OF JANUARY O THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT RI JUSTICE CHEEKATI MANAVEND BLE SRI JUSTICE TUHIN KUMAR G RIT PETITION NO: 33748/2025 NK, REP.BY ITS AUTHORISED O AD K.K, S/O.NARSIMHA RAO, AGE SED OFFICER,
CREDIT REC ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE,, 24-B, GA AMILNADU, PFNIB 12001. NAGER,, CITY UNION BANK, RAJHM ASAI DURGA PRASAD, S/O.SAMB OCC BRANCH MANAGER, D.NO. 7 T.NAGAR, RAJHMUNDRY, EAS 3101. ...P AND RECOVERY TRIBIUNAL, VISA Y ITS PRESIDING OFFICER, VISAKH BABU, S/O.SRI.J.CHINNA VENKAT R USINESS, R/O.D.NO. 10-176, JV AST GODAVARI DISTRICT, PIN-5334 ...RES le 226 of the Constitution of India pra the affidavit filed therewith, the High rder or direction more particularly in th DESH
Y DRANATH ROY GEDELA OFFICER, SRI. ED 54 YEARS, OVERY AND ANDHI NAGAR, MUNDRY, SRI. BASIVA RAO, 7-30-9AND7-28, ST GODAVARI PETITIONER(S) AKHAPATNAM HAPATNAM. RAO, AGED 50 R COMPLEX,
SPONDENT(S): aying that in the h Court may be he nature of writ of Mandamus or any Appropriate Writ by declaring the Inaction of the First Respondent in not deciding the S.A.No.113 of 2024, Filed by the second Respondent, and not deciding the matter even after filing the Written Arguments by the Bank, continuing the stay of Further Proceedings, granting Numerous adjournments without reason, is contrary to Section 17(5) of the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interests Act, 2002, contrary to the Judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in SLP(Civil) Number-21255 of 2025, Dated 07-10-2025 in Indian Overseas Bank Vs M/s. Radhey Infra Solutions Private Limited, Contrary to Articles 14, 16, 19, 21 of Constitution, and against the principals of natural justice, contrary to Law, and this Hon’ble Court may be Pleased to Direct the Hon’ble DRT, Visakhapatnam to hear the matter in S.A.No.113 of 2024 expeditiously, and to pass IA NO: 1 OF 2025 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 direct the First Respondent to adjudicate the matter in S.A.No.113 of 2024 expeditiously, as per the Judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in SLP(Civil) Number-21255 of 2025, Dated 07-10-2025 in Indian Overseas Bank Vs M/s. Radhey Infra Solutions Private Limited, and to pass Counsel for the Petitioner(S):
1. S SATYANARAYANA MOORTHY Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1. The Court made the following: ORDER: (Per Hon’ble Sri Justice Cheekati Manavendranath Roy)
Heard learned counsel for the petitioners.
2. Since the relief sought in the writ petition is only relating to a direction to the Debts Recovery Tribunal to dispose of securitization application No.113 of 2024 filed by the 2nd respondent, expeditiously, notice to the respondents is dispensed with.
3. The petitioners are the City Union Bank. The 2nd respondent has filed securitization application No.113 of 2024 on the file of the Debts Recovery Tribunal, Visakhapatnam, against the petitioners, challenging the measures initiated by the petitioners-Bank under the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (for short, ‘the Act’) against the 2nd respondent.
4. The grievance of the petitioners is that the Tribunal is not disposing of the said securitization application and it has granted numerous adjournments contrary to Section 17(5) of the Act and contrary to judgment of the Apex Court rendered in SLP(Civil).No.21255 of 2025 dated 07.10.2025 in the case of Indian Overseas Bank v. M/s. Radhey Infra Solutions Private Limited. According to the petitioners, there is need for expeditious disposal of the said securitization application.
5. Therefore, the Writ Petition is disposed of with a direction to the 1st respondent-Debts Recovery Tribunal, Visakhapatnam, to dispose of the said securitization application No.113 of 2024, after conducting the trial expeditiously within a period of two months from the date of receipt of this order, according to law. 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: 08.01.2026 MDP