WP/10742/2026 of Sri Komiri Shetty Surender Rao Vs The Union of India on 6 May 2026

ORDER:

This Writ Petition is filed to issue an appropriate writ, order, or direction, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring .the action of respondent No.3 in issr"r.ing notice dated 29.01.2026 and not considering the objections submitted by the petitioner on 24.03.2026 as illegal, arbitrary, and violative of the principles of natural justice and the guidelines issued by the Reserve Bank of India vide Circular dated L2.O8.2O22 bearing RBI|2022-2311O8, D9R.ORG.REC.65/2t.O4.15812022-23, and consequently direct respondent No.3 to consider the case of the petitioner in accordance wittr law, besides passing such other order or orders as this Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.

2. Heard Sri N. Srikanth Goud, learned counsel for the petitioner; Sri N. Bhujanga Rao, Iearned Deputy Solicitor General of .India, for : i I ! I \

respondent No. 1; Ms. Keerthi Sachin, learned counsel for respondent No.3-HDFC Bank and sri Ramavaram chandrashekar Reddy, learned counsel for respondent No.S.

3. The case of the petitioner, in brief, is that he entered into an Agreement of Sale with respondent No.5 in respect of the subject propert5r, namely premises bearing H.No.2-2-1|O9/BK /MlGlgg, plot No.99, Bathukamma Kunta, Bagh Amberpet, Hyderabad-S00ol3, and paid substantial amounts towards sale consideration. Pursuant thereto, the petitioner claims to have been put in possession of the said property and to have invested considerable amounts towards its development and improvements. The grievance of the petitioner is that respondent No.3 initiated proceedings under the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Securigr Interest Act, 2OO2 (for short 'SARFAESI Act") and issued notice dated 29.01.2026 without considering the objections submitted by him on 24.03.2026. It is contended that the petitioner is ready and willing to clear the outstanding dues payable to respondent No.3 as well as the balance sale consideration payable to respondent No.S, and therefore seeks appropriate directions to respondent No.3 to consider his objections and act in accordance with law and the RBI circular dated L2.o9.2o22.

Per contra, learned counsel for respondent No.3-HDFC Bank submits that the loan account of respondent No.5 was classified as an Non-Performing Asset (NpA) on account of continuous default in I I I

I t I ! repaJrment, and proceedings under the SARFAESI Act were initiated strictly in accordance with law. He further submits that the Bank is not aware of the alleged Agreement of Sale entered into between the petitioner and respondent No.S, and that no transfer of rights could have been effected without the consent of the Bank. However, it is stated that, upon payment of the outstanding dues by the petitioner, the case of the petitioner would be considered by respondent No.3 in accordance with Iaw.

5. Today, learned counsel for the petitioner liled a memo stating that the petitioner has already paid an amount of Rs.5,O0,0OO/- through Demand Draft bearing No.494848 dated 16.04.2026 in favour of respondent No.3-HDFC Bank and undertakes to pay the remaining outstanding amount within four weeks from today. It is also stated that the petitioner issued cheque No.503178 dated 15.05.2026 for Rs.20,00,OOO/- in favour of respondent No.S and undertook to pay the remaining balance amount of Rs.8,OO,O00/- within one week from today.

6. Learned counsel for respondent Nos.3 and 5 submits that in the event of default in payment by the petitioner, liberty may be reserved in favour of respond.ent Nos.3 and 5 to proceed further in accordance with law. T. Having regard to the submissions made by learned counsel for both sides, and in view of the memo filed by the petitioner expressing readiness and willingness to clear the outstanding dues, this Court i I 1l t, I I I l! I ,i ::

:l deems it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition directing respondent No.3 to consider the case of the petitioner in accordance with law and pass appropriate orders as expeditiously as possible upon payment of the outstanding amount by the petitioner. In the meantime, respondent No.3 shall not take any coercive steps against the petitioner, subject to the petitioner complying with the undertaking given in the memo filed before this court- In the event of default in p"y*.nt of the amounts as undertaken by the petitioner, respondent Nos.3 and 5 shal be at liberty to proceed against the petitioner in accordance with law.

8. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. Miscellanegus petilions, it aly pending, shalt stand closed. SD/. B. REKHA RANI ISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To, I

1. The Secretary, Ministry of Finance, Union of lndia, New Delhi.

2. The Chief Chief Manager , Reserve Bank of lndia, 6 Sansad Marg New Delhi 1 10001

3. The Manager, HDFC Bank Ltd. Retail Portfolio Management Collections. 5-9- 2211, Shapoorji Tower, 4th Floor. Adarsh Nagar, Hyderabad, Telangana - 500063.

4. One CC to SRl. N SRIKANTH GOUD, Advocate [OPUCI

5. One CC to SRl. N BHUJANGA RAO, Deputy Solicitor General of lndia IoPUCI

6. One CC to MS.KEERTHI SACHIN, Advocate [OPUC]

7. One CC to SRI RAMAVARAM CHANDRASEKHAR REDDY, Advocate loPUcl

8. Two CD Copies DAN -**effiffi#ffi- '#Effir

/I HIGH COURT DATED: 06/0512026

ORDER

WP.No.10742 of 2026 DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS t o *o f{ L4 .r$

-\ ss ! ) * ") f q ou.

H H I i Et @ * & i . i ; I I i I I i I I I I I I I I I I I I : I I