WP/33234/2025 of CHEKURI SRIRAMA MURTHY Vs SHIRAM FINANCE LIMITED on 30 November 2025

1. CHEKURI SRIRAM YEARS, PROPRIET 123/C, SRI SAI THIMMAPURAM-53

1. SHIRAM FINANCE CITY UNION FIN MANAGING DIREC PHASE, INDUSTR

2. SHIRAM FINANCE OFFICER, DIVIS SUPER BAZAR C KAKINADA DISTRIC Petition under Articl circumstances stated in pleased toPleased to iss the nature of WRIT OF M Loan Account No. KKN No.2 as illegal, arbitrary E HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRAD AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) AY, THE FIRST DAY OF DECEMBER THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT RI JUSTICE CHEEKATI MANAVEND BLE SRI JUSTICE TUHIN KUMAR G RIT PETITION NO: 33234/2025 A MURTHY, S/O PEDDARAJU, AG TOR SRI SATYA SAI HOUSING, GANESH GARDENS, VIVEKANA 33005, KAKINADA, KAKINADA DIST AND E LIMITED, (FORMERLY KNOWN NANCE LIMITED)., REPRESEN CTOR, SRI TOWERS, PLOT NO. IAL ESTATE, GUNDY, CHENNAI-60 E LIMITED, REPRESENTED BY ITS IONAL OFFICE, D.NO. 20-1-10, COMPLEX, MAIN ROAD, KAKI CT. ...RES le 226 of the Constitution of India pra the affidavit filed therewith, the High sue a writ order or direction more pa MANDAMUS declaring the e-auction h NDATF1706020001 on 26-11-2025 y, violative of SARFAESI Act and co DESH

DRANATH ROY GEDELA GED ABOUT 58 R/O. D.NO. 5- ANDACENTER, RICT ...PETITIONER AS SHRIRAM NTED BY ITS 14A, SOUTH 0032. S DIVISIONAL 2ND FLOOR, NADA-533001, SPONDENT(S): aying that in the h Court may be articularly one in held against the by Respondent onsequently set aside the auction proceedings and further consequently direct the respondents not to issue the Sale Certificate in favour of auction purchaser and also consequently direct the respondents to consider petitioner's representation for settlement/OTS and allow petitioner reasonable time to clear dues, is illegal, arbitrary, violation of the principle of natural justice and 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 pleased to suspend the auction proceedings dated 26-11-2025 against the loan account No. No. KKNDATFl706020001 and pass Counsel for the Petitioner:

1. SIMHACHALAM KARUKOLA Counsel for the Respondent(S):

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

Heard Mr. Simhachalam Karukola, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. O.Udaya Kumar, learned counsel for respondent Nos.1 and 2 who appeared on the advance notice received from the petitioner.

2. Having availed loan from the 1st respondent-finance institution by offering the immovable property as security for the said loan, as the petitioner committed default in repayment of the loan amount, the respondents have initiated measures under Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (for short, ‘SARFAESI Act’) and sold the secured asset in the e-auction that was held on 26.11.2025. The petitioner now seeks to challenge the legal validity of the said e-auction dated 26.11.2025 on various grounds that are urged in this writ petition.

3. The petitioner got an efficacious remedy of challenging the said e-auction before the Debts Recovery Tribunal. But, without approaching the appropriate forum, he has directly approached this Court by way of filing this writ petition. No explanation is offered as to why he has approached this Court and filed this writ petition without availing his remedy before the Debts Recovery Tribunal. Therefore, 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 avail his remedy by way of approaching the Debts Recovery Tribunal, challenging the said e-action. 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: 01.12.2025 MDP