Andhra Pradesh High Court
WP/6820/2017 of Vegeshna S V Subbaraju, Vs IDBI Bank Limited, Regional Office, on 14 October 2025
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3459] WEDNESDAY, THE FIFTEENTH DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE SUMATHI JAGADAM WRIT PETITION NO: 6820/2017 Between: 1. VEGESHNA S V SUBBARAJU,, S/O. VENKATA RAMA RAJU, HINDU,
APHC010085872017
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
AT AMARAVATI
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
WEDNESDAY,THE FIFTEENTH DAY OF OCTOBER
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE SUMATHI JAGADAM
WRIT PETITION NO: 6820/2017
Between:
1. VEGESHNA S V SUBBARAJU,, S/O. VENKATA RAMA RAJU, HINDU, AGED 40 YEARS, OCC: CULTIVATION, RIO. F.NO.301, TELECOM
NAGAR, GACHIBOWLI, HYDERABAD
...PETITIONER
AND
1. IDBI BANK LIMITED REGIONAL OFFICE, REP.BY ITS GM &
REGIONAL HEAD, RETAIL BANKING GGROUP(AP II), FIRST
FLOOR,
PYDAH
CHAMBERS,
V.LP.ROAD,
SIRIPURAM,
VISAKHAPATNAM 530 003,
2. IDBI BANK LIMITED BHIMAVARAM BRANCH, REP.BY ITS BRANCH
MANAGER/AUTHORISED
OFFICER,
DOOR
NO.22-11-9,BESIDE
LONDON HOSPITAL, SUNDAY MARKET, BHIMAVARAM, WEST
GODAVARI DISTRICT, A.P., PIN CODE 534201
...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 toto issue a writ or order or direction more fully in the nature of writ of mandamus declaring the action of the respondents bank in not considering the payments deposited by the petitioner M savings bank accounts which was linked with the Loan account as per the OTS sanctioned Letter dated 17-02- 2016 of the respondent bank is illegal, arbitrary, contrary to law and violative of Article 19 of the Constitution of India besides being opposed the Principles
of Natural Justice and consequently direct the respondents to consider the OTS Sanctioned letter dated 17-02-2016
IA NO: 1 OF 2017(WPMP 8360 OF 2017
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 Direct the respondents to consider the OTS Sanctioned letter dated 17-02- 2016 of the respondent bank pending the above Writ Petition Counsel for the Petitioner:
1. JAMI MADHAVI
Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1.
The Court made the following:
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.
ORDER:
Sri B. Anil Kumar, learned counsel, representing Smt. Jami Madhavi, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the cause in the Writ Petition does not survive for adjudication.
Recording the submission of learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, the Writ Petition is dismissed as infructuous. No order as to costs.
As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed. __________________________ JUSTICE SUMATHI JAGADAM Date: 15.10.2025 SCH
THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE SUMATHI JAGADAM
WRIT PETITION NO: 6820/2017
Date: 15.10.2025 SCH