WP/36084/2025 of GOGINENI SRINIVASA RAO Vs THE UNION OF INDIA on 5 January 2026

1. GOGINENI SRINIV ABOUT

YEA LAKSHMIPURAM DISTRICT PIN 5212

1. THE UNION OF IN FINANCE DEPART BUILDING, SANSA

2. M/S UNION BANK ASSISTANT REC VIJAYAWADA, N.T.

3. BOLLINENI AVINAS YEARS, R/O LAXM 521235 4.

4. BOLLINENI NIRA TIRUVURU MANDA Petition under Articl circumstances stated in E HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRAD AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) AY, THE SIXTH DAY OF JANUARY O THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT RI JUSTICE CHEEKATI MANAVEND BLE SRI JUSTICE TUHIN KUMAR G RIT PETITION NO: 36084/2025 VASA RAO, S/O.MADHUSUDHANA ARS, OCC BUSINESS

R/O PANCHAYAT, TIRUVURU MAN

235. AND NDIA, REP BY ITS SECRETARY TMENT OF FINANCIAL SERVICES J D MARG NEW DELHI 110001 2. K OF INDIA, REP BY ITS CHIE OVERY BRANCH, RR APPA R .R DISTRICT 520001 3. SH BORROWER, S/O.NIRANJAN AG MIPURAM, TIRUVURU MANDAL, N. ANJAN, S/O MUTHAIAH R/O AL, N.T.R DISTRICT 521235. ...RES le 226 of the Constitution of India pra the affidavit filed therewith, the High DESH

DRANATH ROY GEDELA RAO AGED O. D.NO.3-37, NDAL, N.T.R ...PETITIONER MINISTRY OF JEEVAN DEEP EF MANAGER RAO STREET GED ABOUT 36 T.R DISTRICT LAXMIPURAM SPONDENT(S): aying that in the h Court may be pleased to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, declaring the action of Respondent Nos.2 to 4 in attempting to take forcible physical possession of the petitioner's residential property through an Advocate Commissioner pursuant to Crl.M.P. No.189 of 2025 in C.F. No.377 of 2025 on the file of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Machilipatnam, and the consequential Vacation Notice dated 11.12.2025, as illegal, arbitrary, without jurisdiction and violative of principles of natural justice and Article 300-A of the Constitution of India, in violation of SARFAESI Act, 2002 and consequently restrain the respondents, their officials, Advocate Commissioner, police authorities or any other persons from interfering with the petitioner's peaceful possession and enjoyment of the subject property or from taking physical possession thereof on 24-12-2025 or on any subsequent date, and further direct the respondents to strictly follow due process of law, including impleading the petitioner and affording him an opportunity of hearing, without prejudice to the petitioner's rights in S.A. No.774 of 2025 pending before the Hon'ble Debt Recovery Tribunal, 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 stay all further proceedings pursuant to the Vacation Notice dated 11.12.2025 issued through an Advocate Commissioner in CrI.M.P. No. 189 of 2025 in C.F. No.377 of 2025 on the file of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Machilipatnam, and to pass Counsel for the Petitioner:

1. V.N.V.SURYA DATTU 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 petitioner and Ms. V.Dyumani, learned Standing Counsel for the 2nd respondent-Union Bank of India.

2. Since this writ petition is being disposed of with a direction to the petitioner to pursue his remedy before the Debts Recovery Tribunal where securitization application No.774 of 2025 filed by him is pending, notice to the unofficial respondent Nos.3 and 4 is dispensed with.

3. The 3rd respondent is the principal borrower and the 4th respondent is the guarantor for the loan availed by the 3rd respondent. On the ground that the 3rd respondent committed default in repayment of the loan amount, the Bank has initiated measures under Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (for short, ‘the Act’), to take possession of the secured asset for sale of the same in the public auction.

4. The petitioner is the 3rd party to the loan transaction and he claims to be the purchaser of the secured asset from the 3rd respondent, who is the owner of the property. Admittedly, as per the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, the alleged purchase of the secured asset by the petitioner from the 4th respondent is subsequent to the mortgage of the said property to the Bank. Yet we are not going to decide anything on merits relating to the merits of the case.

5. Suffice it to say that as the petitioner has already approached the Debts Recovery Tribunal, which is an appropriate forum for redressal of his grievance under the Act by way of filing securitization application No.774 of 2025, he has to be relegated to the Tribunal to pursue his remedy before the Tribunal in the securitization application that was already filed by him and pending before the Tribunal.

6. Therefore, the Writ Petition is disposed of with a direction to the petitioner to pursue his remedy before the Tribunal in securitization application No.774 of 2025 which is filed and pending before the Tribunal. However, as a coordinate bench of this Court granted stay of eviction on 24.12.2025, the said stay shall continue till the I.A.No.4963 of 2025 filed by the petitioner before the Tribunal for stay of the proceedings is disposed of within a period of two (2) weeks from date of this order. If the petitioner fails to get ready for hearing in the said stay application and cooperate with the Tribunal for its disposal within the time stipulated above, the order of stay granted by this Court shall stand vacated without any further reference to this Court. If the petitioner gets ready for hearing in the stay petition, the Tribunal shall invariably dispose of the said stay petition, on merits, within two (2) weeks as directed supra. 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: 06.01.2026 MDP