Andhra Pradesh High Court
WP/36426/2025 of MAHYS PHARMACEUTICALS Vs THE UNION OF INDIA on 1 January 2026
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3558] FRIDAY, THE SECOND DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE CHEEKATI MANAVENDRANATH ROY AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TUHIN KUMAR GEDELA WRIT PETITION No.36426 of 2025 Between: 1.
APHC010705632025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
AT AMARAVATI
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
FRIDAY, THE SECOND DAY OF JANUARY
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE CHEEKATI MANAVENDRANATH ROY
AND
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TUHIN KUMAR GEDELA
WRIT PETITION No.36426 of 2025
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. M/s.MAHYS PHARMACEUTICALS, REP. BY ITS PROPRIETOR YENUGULA SAMBASIVA RAO S/O HANUMANTHA RAO AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS R/O SY.NO.519-C3A2, BESIDE AMARA ENGINEERING COLLEGE, SATHULUR VILLAGE, NADENDLA MANDAL, SATHULUR, GUNTUR DISTRICT, AP.
2. YENUGUAL KOMALA W/O YENUGULA SAMBASIVA RAO AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, R/O SY.NO.519-C3A2, BESIDE AMARA ENGINEERING COLLEGE, SATHULUR VILLAGE, NADENDIA MANDAL, SATHULUR, GUNTUR DISTRICT, AP.
...PETITIONER(S) AND
1. THE UNION OF INDIA, REP. BY ITS FINANCE DEPARTMENT NORTH BLOCK, NEW DELHI.
2. THE DEBT RECOVERY TRIBUNAL (DRT), DOOR No.31-31-21, NARAYAN BHAVAN, SAI BABA STREET, DABA GARDENS, VISAKHAPATNAM - 530020
3. M/S AXIS BANK LIMITED REP.BY ITS AUTHORIZED OFFICER MR.CHOKKAKULA VARUN PRAJNA VARDHA OFFICE AT No.43-9-141,4TH FLOOR, SRI GAYATRI TOWERS, SRIKANYA
MAIN ROAD, DONDAPARTHY, VISHAKHAPATNAM - 530016
...RESPONDENT(S): Counsel for the Petitioner(S):
1. A.SRINIVASA RAO Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1. B. AMRUTHA The Court made the following:
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE CHEEKATI MANAVENDRANATH ROY AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE TUHIN KUMAR GEDELA WRIT PETITION No.36426 of 2025 O R D E R: (Per Hon’ble Sri Justice Cheekati Manavendranath Roy)
Heard learned counsel for the petitioners. Ms. B. Amrutha, learned Central Government Counsel, submits that she has filed vakalath for respondent No.1 - Union of India in the Registry today. Therefore, we have heard her submissions on behalf of respondent No.1.
2. Since the grievance of the petitioners is only relating to non- disposal of O.A.No.776 of 2025 pending on the file of the 2nd respondent - Debts Recovery Tribunal, Visakhapatnam, notice to the 3rd respondent-bank is dispensed with.
3. The petitioners are the borrowers, who availed loan from the 3rd respondent-bank by offering the immovable property of the 2nd petitioner as security for repayment of the loan amount. As the petitioners failed to repay the borrowed amount, the bank has initiated measures under the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002, and filed O.A.No.776 of 2025 on the file of the 2nd respondent - Debts Recovery Tribunal, Visakhapatnam, for recovery of the amount due from the borrowers and sought to take possession of the secured asset. It is stated that the petitioners, who are respondents in the said O.A., have filed their written statement in the said O.A., but the Debts Recovery Tribunal has posted the matter to 11.02.2026. Therefore, the petitioners have approached this Court by way of filing this writ petition to direct the 2nd respondent- Debts Recovery Tribunal to dispose of the said O.A. expeditiously.
4. The said O.A.No.776 of 2025 filed by the 3rd respondent-bank on the file of the 2nd respondent- Debts Recovery Tribunal is only a fresh matter, which is filed very recently in the year 2025. Even though written statement was filed in the said O.A., it cannot be taken up expeditiously for hearing by giving priority to it, when other old matters are pending on the file of the 2nd respondent - Debts Recovery Tribunal. Therefore, no direction to dispose of the said O.A. expeditiously as sought for can be issued in the present writ petition.
5. If the petitioners got any urgency, as it is stated that the 3rd respondent-bank sought to take possession of the secured asset, the petitioners are at liberty to file an interlocutory application before the Debts Recovery Tribunal for redressal of their grievance. But, they cannot seek direction to the Tribunal to dispose of the O.A. expeditiously when it has been instituted very recently. So, we are not inclined to interfere in the matter and to entertain this writ petition.
6. Therefore, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the petitioners to approach the Debts Recovery Tribunal itself with a request to take up the matter expeditiously, if they got any urgency.
As a sequel, interlocutory applications, if any pending, in this case shall stand closed. There shall be no order as to costs.
________________________________________ JUSTICE CHEEKATI MANAVENDRANATH ROY
______________________________________ JUSTICE TUHIN KUMAR GEDELA Date: 02.01.2026 IBL
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE CHEEKATI MANAVENDRANATH ROY AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TUHIN KUMAR GEDELA
WRIT PETITION No.36426 of 2025
Dt: 02.01.2026 IBL