WP/29287/2025 of SONAC Vs THE INDIAN BANK on 30 October 2025

1. M/s. SONAC, REP. BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER, KODURU NEERAJA W/O. KODURU SURESH KUMAR REDDY, AGED ABOUT

YEARS, R/O.D.NO.25-3-1479,

GOWTHAMI NAGAR, PODALKUR ROAD, NELLORE, SPSR NELLORE DISTRICT.

...PETITIONER AND

1. THE INDIAN BANK, MAIN BRANCH, TRUNK ROAD, NELLORE, SPSR NELLORE DISTRICT, REP. BY ITS AUTHORIZED OFFICER.

2. THE INDIAN BANK, STRESS ASSETS MANAGEMENT BRANCH, 5-1-679, SURABHI ARCADE, BANK STREET, KOTI, HYDERABAD, REP. BY ITS AUTHORIZED OFFICER.

...RESPONDENT(S): Counsel for the Petitioner:

1. C SUBODH Counsel for the Respondent(S):

1. SREEDHAR VALIVETI 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.29287 of 2025

O R D E R: (Per Hon’ble Sri Justice Cheekati Manavendranath Roy)

Heard Mr. C. Subodh, learned counsel for the petitioner, and Mr. Sreedhar Valiveti, learned Standing Counsel for Indian Bank appearing for the respondents.

2. Earlier, when the matter came up for admission, Mr. Sreedhar Valiveti, learned Standing Counsel for the respondents-bank, has taken notice on behalf of the respondents and requested time to seek instructions.

3. The petitioner is the borrower. It has availed loan from the respondents-Indian Bank. As it has committed default in repayment of the loan amount, the bank has initiated proceedings under Section 14 of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (for short, ‘the Act’), after complying with procedure prescribed under the Act. The bank has approached the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Nellore, seeking an order to take possession of the property in question as a secured creditor. The learned Magistrate has passed an order dated 10.05.2024, directing the Advocate Commissioner to take possession of the property by 10.07.2024.

4. Alleging that the Advocate Commissioner did not take possession of the property as directed by the learned Magistrate by 10.07.2024 and that without either obtaining an order for extension of time or filing fresh application under Section 14 of the Act, the Advocate Commissioner is now making an attempt to take possession of the property contrary to law, the petitioner filed the present writ petition.

5. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, when once the learned Magistrate has fixed a time limit for taking possession of the property i.e., by 10.07.2024 and if the possession is not taken within the said stipulated period, the bank has to seek extension of time before expiry of the said period and if the stipulated time is already expired, the bank has to file a fresh application and it cannot take possession of the property without resorting to any of the aforesaid two modes available to it.

6. Repelling the said contention, learned Standing Counsel for the bank vehemently contended that the time fixed by the learned Magistrate for taking possession of the property is, in fact, being extended from time to time and it was lastly extended till 22.10.2025 and the matter is posted to 11.11.2025 before the learned Magistrate. Therefore, he would submit that the proceedings are still pending before the learned Magistrate, as the time is being extended from time to time and in proof of the said fact, he has also produced copy of the docket order in Crl.M.P.No.97 of 2024 in C.F.No.5 of 2024 on the file of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate-cum-Principal Assistant Sessions Judge, Nellore.

7. It is evident from the said copy of the docket proceedings that the time was lastly extended on 12.09.2025 till 22.10.2025. Therefore, suppressing the said material fact that the time is being extended by the learned Magistrate, the petitioner has approached this Court with unclean hands misleading the Court by stating that without seeking extension of time, the bank is making attempts to take possession of the property. Therefore, there is absolutely no merit in the said contention of the petitioner made in the writ petition.

8. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that in the earlier round of litigation in W.P.No.12357 of 2024, this Court has directed the bank to file an amendment petition, making a mention about the payments made by the petitioner towards repayment of the loan amount and thereupon, the learned Magistrate was required to pass appropriate orders. He contended that till now, even though amendment petition was filed by the bank and allowed, the learned Magistrate did not pass any fresh appropriate order.

9. Since the proceedings are still pending before the Magistrate, the petitioner is at liberty to raise all its contentions before the learned Magistrate, including the need to pass appropriate orders as per the amendment petition filed by the bank as well as the contention raised that a sum of Rs.3.00 crores was recovered after selling some of the secured assets. If any such contentions are raised by the petitioner/ debtor, the learned Magistrate has to take into consideration such contentions and pass appropriate orders according to law.

10. As we do not find any merit in the principal ground raised by the petitioner in this writ petition that without seeking extension of time, the bank is now making efforts to take possession of the property and as the material fact that time is being extended from time to time has been suppressed by the petitioner in this writ petition, we are not inclined to interfere in this writ petition. We, therefore, absolutely see no merit in the present writ petition to entertain the same.

11. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed, leaving it open to the petitioner to raise all other contentions raised before this Court, in the proceedings that are pending before the learned Magistrate. There shall be no order as to costs.

As a sequel, interlocutory applications, if any pending, in this case shall stand closed.

________________________________________ JUSTICE CHEEKATI MANAVENDRANATH ROY

______________________________________ JUSTICE TUHIN KUMAR GEDELA Date: 31.10.2025 IBL

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE CHEEKATI MANAVENDRANATH ROY AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TUHIN KUMAR GEDELA

WRIT PETITION No.29287 of 2025

Dt: 31.10.2025 IBL