Andhra Pradesh High Court

WP/24166/2023 of Bandikolla Chris Antony, Vs THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH on 23 November 2025

Cites 0, Cited by 0

HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH MONDAY, THE TWENTY FOURTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE CHEEKATI MANAVENDRANATH ROY THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TUHIN KUMAR GEDELA WRIT PETITION NO: 24166/2023 Between: 1. BANDIKOLLA CHRIS ANTONY,, S/O. ADINARAYANA, HINDU, AGED

APHC010466802023

IN TH

MONDAY, THE

TWO

THE HONOURABLE SR

THE HONOURAB

WR

Between:

Citations and Judicial Treatment

No citing decisions in the index yet

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…

1. BANDIKOLLA CHR ABOUT 19 YEARS FALT NO. 504, SA VIJAYAWADA -520

1. THE STATE OF PRINCIPAL SE SECRETARIAT, VE

2. THE GANDHI CO AUTHORIZED OF VIJAYAWADA, NTR

3. BANDIKOLLA ADI AGED ABOUT 49 NEAR NAVATHA VIJYAWADA-52000

4. BANDIKOLLA JY NARAYANA, HINDU NEAR NAVATHA VIJYAWADA-52000 E HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRAD AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) E TWENTY FOURTH DAY OF NOVEM THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT RI JUSTICE CHEEKATI MANAVEND BLE SRI JUSTICE TUHIN KUMAR G RIT PETITION NO: 24166/2023 RIS ANTONY,, S/O. ADINARAYANA, S, STUDENT AND PART TIME BU AI BALRAM PARADISE, RAMACHAN

AND ANDHRA PRADESH, REPRESEN ECRETARY, COOPERATIVE ELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. OPERATIVE URBAN BANK LTD, FFICER, MUSEUM ROAD, GO R DIST., 520 002 NARAYANA, S/O. LATE. SUBBA YEARS, SELF EMPLOYED, R/O. D ROAD TRANSPORT, NAGARJU

08. YOTHI SWARUPA, W/O. BAND U, AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS, R/O. D ROAD TRANSPORT, NAGARJ

08. DESH

MBER DRANATH ROY GEDELA HINDU, AGED USINESS, R/O. NDRA NAGAR, ...PETITIONER NTED BY ITS SOCIETIES, REP. BY ITS OVERNORPET, RAO, HINDU, D. NO. 48-18-5, UNA NAGAR, DIKOLLA ADI D. NO. 48-18-5, UNA NAGAR,

CMR,J & GTK,J W.P.No.24166 of 2023

...RESPONDENT(S): Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased topleased to pass orders, to issue writ order or orders and direction, more particularly, one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the 2nd Respondent, in issuing the impugned notice dated 01-07-2023, u/s13(2) of the SARFAESI Act, to the extent of classifying the property covered by D. No. 48-18-5, Nagarjuna Nagar, Gunadala, Vijayawada in R.S. No. 327/2 including with the RCC building structure within the extent of 183.6 Sq. Yards, mentioned in schedule-2 of the impugned notice dated 01-07-2023, as secured asset of Respondent No.3 and under the said guise deciding to proceed under the provision section 13 (4) of the SARFAESI Act, is illegal, arbitrary, unjust, violative of Articles 14, 21 and 300 A of the Constitution of India and the same is liable to be set aside, as the same also amounts to abuse of section 13(4) of SARFAESI Act, consequently declare that no valid encumbrance is created over the said property covered by schedule-2 of the impugned notice dated 01-07-2023, and also to pass IA NO: 1 OF 2023 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 pass interim orders directing the Respondent No.2, not to initiate any coercive steps of taking possession or proceeding any further, over the property covered by D. No. 48-18-5, Nagarjuna Nagar, Gunadala, Vijayawada in R.S. No. 327/2 including the RCC building structure within the extent of 183.6 SQ. Yards, in pursuance of the impugned notice dated 01-07-2023 issued by the 2nd Respondent under section 13(2) of the SARFAESI Act, pending disposal of the writ petition and to pass Counsel for the Petitioner:

1. K SATYANARAYANA MURTHY Counsel for the Respondent(S):

1. P A SESHU

2. GP FOR COOPERATION

CMR,J & GTK,J W.P.No.24166 of 2023

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

Mr. K.P.R.Vital Kumar, learned counsel representing Mr. K.Satyanarayana Murthy, learned counsel for petitioner, seeks permission to withdraw the writ petition.

2. Permission is accorded.

3. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is dismissed as withdrawn. 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: 24.11.2025 MDP

You have used today's free searches. Sign in, for free, to keep searching without a limit.

Compass reads the judgments for you and finds the paragraphs for and against your question. Sign in to use it.

My Vault follows judgments for you and records every later decision that cites them. Sign in to keep one.

Sign in to download the court's PDF. The full text stays free to read here.

Sign in, for free, to download the court copy. Reading the full text here stays open to everyone.

Search and read Indian judgments without limits, save them to My Vault and find the relevant paragraphs with Compass.

Open the sign-in page instead