High Court · 2025

4. Chetla Janardhan, Flat No. 403, Muncipal no7-24814-3, Sri balaji happy Homes Residency situated at Garmillashivar Limit, code no 83, block 7, Mancherial municipality and mandal mancherial-504208

5. Chetli Sharnya, Flat No. 403, Muncipal no7-248t4-3,Sri balaji happy Homes Residency situated at Garmillashivar Limit, code no 83 block 7. Mancherial municipality and mandal mancherial-504208

6. Chetla Susheela, W/o. Bhiumaiah, H.No. 6-146(New), 6-72(old),Sy No. 274, near old Kamakshi Talkies, Luxettipet, Adilabad Districl5O4215.

7. Chetla Srinivas, D.No. 7-4-63, Chinna ltrlazid Near Ravindra Public School. Siddiprt District Siddepet- 502103.

8. Sudheer Kurhar Bhayya, S/o. Bayya Sudarshan, Villa '16-3'171586, Lane 10 SVmphony Pbrk Homes, Opp to Rainbow lnternational School, Beeramguda Patancheru, Krishtareddipet, Sangareddy, Telangana - 502319 ...RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia prraying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issub an order, direction or Writ, more in the nature of a writ of mandamus declaring the action of second respondent hererin in not registering the sale certific/rte daled 14.02.2022 issued by the petitioner bank undei the provisions of securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security lnterest Act, 2002, on the pretext of ppendency of an interim order of attachment passed by Hon'ble City Civil Court vide l.A No. 150 of 2021 in CrS. No. 19 of 2021 on the file of Hon'ble Senior Civil Judge and declaring the same as illegal, arbitrary, high hdnded and violative of provisions of the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security lnterest Act, 2OO2, violative of Article 14,21 of constitution of lndia and violative of principles of natural justice and consequential prayer to register the Sale Certificate dated 14.'2.2022, issued by the petitioner bank in favour of the 12th respondent herein in rbliation to residential open place admeasuring 438.75 sq. yards or 366.83 sq. mek)rs in Sy.No. 256 situated at Mancherial Town and Mandal, Telangana lA 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 ro direct the Second respondent herein, to register the Sale Certificate dated 14.12.2022 issued by the petitioner bank in favour of Bth respondent herein c,n relation to open place admeasuring admeasuring 438.75 sq. yards or 366.83 sq. meters in Sy.No. 256 sitrlated at Mancherial Town and tVlandal, Telangana Counsel for the Petitioner:SRl. G KALYAN CHAKRAVARTHY Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1&2: GP FOR REVENUE Counsel for the Respondent Nos.3 to 7: -- .. Counsel for the Respondent No.8: SRl. TERA RAJINIKANTH Rl=DDy The Court made the following: ORDER THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.SARATH WRIT PETITION No.5353 of 2o23 ORDER: Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Stamps and Registration and learned counsel for the respondent No.8 and perused the material on record.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner challenging the action of the respondent No.2 in not registering the sale certificate dated 14. 12.2022 issued by the petitioner-bank under the provisions of Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2OO2 (for brevity, 'SARFAESI Act') basing on the pretext of the Warrant of Attachment Orders dated 2O.lO.2O2l passed by the Principal Senior Civil Judge, Mancherial, in I.A.No.150 of 2O2l in O.S.No.L9 of 2O2l and another Notice-cum-Conditional Attachment Order dated 04.08.2022 passed by the Chit Arbitrator/Deputy Registrar of Karimnagar in I.A.No.8 of 2022 in 2 SK. J W. P. No.5353 2023 Arb.No. 100 ,rf 2022, which is illegal and arbitrary and contrary to the SARFAESI Act.

3. Lcarned counsel for the petitir>ner further submits th:rt the respondent No.4 apltroached the petitioner-b:rnk for the purpose of finance facility in the form of overdraft facility for his business and made an application. Subsequently, the pe.:itioner-bank sanctioned r.L total amount of Rs.4,8O,00,000/- (Rupees Four Crore trighty Lakhs Only) to the resF,ondent No.4 and the salne was sanctioned after depositing title deeds dated 14.08.2014 in respect of his personal property, which is in relation to residential open place admeasuring 438.75 Sq.Yards or 366.83 Sq.Meters IN H.No.12-5l 1 , l2-511O, l2-5111 in Sy.No.256 situared at Mancherial Town & Mandal, as security for repayment of loan and the same is covered by registerr:d sale deed No.4381/2001 dated 23.1I.2OO1. It is submitted rhat respondent Nos.6 and 7 stood as gua_rantors and have signed the ioan documents including the deed for deposit of tit le deeds 3 SK, J W. P. No.5353 2023

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that in view of default in payment, the petitioner-bank initiated proceedings under provisions of Section 14 of SARFAtrSI Act and took over the possession of the property on 03.03.2022 and, later the petitioner-bank sold the property by way of auction in accordance with the procedure contemplated under the SARFAESI Act. In the auction, the respondent No.g stood as highest bidder and the petitioner-bank issued sale certificate on L4.12.2O22 in his favour and confirmed the sale after payment of full amount. After issuance of sale certihcate, the petitioner_bank and the respondent No.S took steps for registration of the sale certificate and approached the respondent No.2 and the respondent No.2 refused to receive the said document on the pretext that the property is under attachment by virtue of Qrders in I.A.No.15O of 2O2I in O.S.No.19 of 2O2l dated 29.1O.2O21passed by principal Senior Civil Judge, Mancheria_l and Notice-cum-Conditional Attachment Order dated 04.Og.2022 passed by the Chit 4 SK, "I W. P. No.5353_2023 Arbitrator/Deputy Registrar of Karimnagar in I.A.No.g of 2022 in Arb.No. IOO of 2022.

5. l,earned counsel for the petrtioner further submits that the action of respondent No.2 is contrar5r to the Orders passed by this Court in Citg r(Jnion Bank Limited 7s Sub Registrar, pedd.apatti antd Ors.,t and the same is followed by another Division Ilench of this Court in \I'.P.No.3S125 of 20lg dated la.lO.2Ol9 and requested to direct the respondent No.2 to register the sale certificate in favour of the respondent No.g. -

6. On the other hand, learne,l Assistant Government Pleader for Stamps and Registration, basing on the counter filed by respondent No.2, submits that though the petitioner herein presented a sare certificate dated 14. 12.2022 under SARFAESI Act an.d the same was accepted by the then Sub_Regrs,trar, SRO, Malcherial for scrutiny, during the scrutin1. of the sard document, it is found that the property mentioned in the sale certificate was already kept in prohibited property ' zots 1s1 atr zts 5 SK, J W. P. No.535iJ_2023 List of the Commissioner and Inspector General of Registration and Stamps Website. The subject property of the writ petition is kept in the prohibited property list on the basis of Warrant Attachment Orders before the Judgment on proof of tailure to furnish security for fulhllment of decree passed by the Court of the Principal Senior Civil Judge at Mancherial uide Order dated

29.1O.2021 in I.A.No.l50 of 2O2l in O.S.No.L9 of 2O2L and another Attachment Order passed by the Chit Arbitrator/Deputy Registrar of Chits, Karimnagar uide Order dated 04.O8.2022 in I.A.No.8 of 2022 in Arb.No.100 of 2022. The sale certificate presented by the petitioner cannot be registered until and unless the Attachment Orders are set aside.

7. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Stamps and Registration further submits that though the sale certificate was issued under SARFAESI Act, it cannot be registered, as the property involved in the sale certificate is already in prohibited list on the website of theIGRS and requested to dismiss the writ petition. 6 sK,./ W. P. No.535.1 202.1

8. Al'ter hearing both sides and tr)erusing the material on record, this Court is of the considered view that there is no dispute with regard to the szJe certificate issued by the petitioner-bank to the responrlent No.8 for the registration of the suit schedule property as per SARFAESI r\ct. The respondent No.4 is 1.he borrower and the resltondent Nos.5 and 6 are the ggarantors of the loan taken by respondent No.4. The petitioner by following thr: procedure contemplated unclt:r SARFAtrSI Act conducted auction for the suit schedule property and issued sale certificate in favour of respondent No.8. Now, the r<:sltondent no.2 refused to register the sale certificate on the ground that there are two attachment Orders on the suit schedule properer ald until the same were vacat(:d, it cannot be possible to regi.ster the sale certilrcate dated 14.12.2022 issued irr favour of respondent No.S. The said contention of respondent No.2 is contrary to the Orders passed by this Court in Citg Union Bank Limited. Vs Sub Registrar, Peddapalli qnd Ors. (supra l). 7 SK. J W. P. No.5353 -202.1

9. The relevant portion of the Judgment 1n Citg (Jnion Ba;nk Linited I/s Sub Registrar, Peddapalli and Ors. (atpra I/ is as follows: "8. 1l is needless to obserue that the ciuil Court has no juisdiction to deol uith subject mdtters pertaining to the SARFAESI Act. In the present scenario, the secured creditor uos not o partg to the ciuil suits before the Courts below and thus the orders of attachment before judgment are not binding on the secured creditor/ Bank. More so, the cause of action before the Courts belort is not u.tithin the ambit of SARFAESIAcT. 10. tJpon fair reading of S.O. 219 in the light of Section 64 of CPC, this Court is of the uieu that it onlg pertains to a ciuil. dispute betueen the piuate parties and it does not include an institutional sole under a statute. Though Section 64 comes into plag onlg after the alienation of the propertg under attachment amongst the priuate persons, the said legal position does not create an embargo upon the Registrar to proceed uith the registration of sale certificates under the SARFAES/ Act as the bank is not a partg to the suit ond the sole is not being effected bg a portg to the attachment order.

12. In similar circumstances, the Keralo High Court in The South Indian Bank Ltd. u. The Sub Registrar (3) WP (C) No. 3875 of 2017 dated 24.11.2016, considered the question whether a sale certificate is liable to be registered or not in uiew of the oyder of attachment before judgment passed by the ciuil Court and held that the secured creditor is entitled to proceed uith tte regi-stration and the Registration Authority cannot stall the process of registration under the garb of an order of attachment passed bg the ciuil Court." The above said hnding of the Division Bench of this Court would squa-rely apply to the instant case and the Registration Authority cannot stall the process of --'1 8 SK, J W. P. No.5353-2023 registratio. of the petitioner-bank in view of the attachmenl. orders

10. hr the instant case a-lso, the petitioner_bank by follou,irrg the SARFAESI Act conducteC auction for the suit sci-redule property and issued sale, certificate in favour of the respondent No.g. In view of the settred raw, the respondent authorities have no power to refuse the registration of the sale certificate under SARFAESI Act on the ground of attachment orders of the ,Civil Court or other authorities for the same property. In view of the same, the Registering Authority has to register the sale certificate issued b-y the petitioner-bank in favour of the respondent No.8 without taking into ac<:ount of the attachment order dated 2g.l}.2o2l in I.A.No. 150 of 2O2l in O.S.No. 19 of 2O2l and Notice_cunr_Conditiona_l Attachment Order dated 04.0g.2022 in I.A.No.8 of 2022 in Arb.No. tOO of 2022. 1 l. Ir-r view of the above findings, the present writ petition is disposed of directing the Registerlng Authority to register rhe sale certificate dated 14.12.2022 * 9 sr(, J W.P. No.5353 2023 presented by the petitioner-bank in favour of the respondent No.8 as per the provisions of SARFAESI Act without reference to the Attachment Orders dated

29.1O.2O2I in I.A.No.150 of 2O2l in O.S.No.19 of 2O2l passed by Principal Senior Civil Judge, Mancherial and Notice-cum-Conditional Attachment Order dated

04.O8.2O22 passed by the Chit Arbitrator/Deputy Registrar of Karimnagar in I.A.No.S of 2022 in Arb.No.IOO of 2022.

12. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of. However, there shall be no order as to costs.

13. Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall also stand closed. //TRUE COPY// SD/. T. TIRUMALA DEVI D PUTY REGISTRAR SECTION OFFICER To,

6. KKS GJP The Principal Secretary, Revenue Department, Hyd bad. Sub Registrar, Office of Sub- Registrar, Mancherial One CC to SRl. G KALYAN CHAKRAVARTHY Advocate [OPUC] One CC to SRl. TERA RAJINIKANTH REDDY Advocate [OPUC] Two CCs to GP FOR REVENUE ,High Court for the State of Telangana' Two,CD Copies $ I Jl HIGH COURT DATE D :0 810412025 ORDER WP.No.5353 of 2023 itie slr,,- ,( :) \_! c .s 2 I APn 2025 * ,?,tr .SPA TCuto DISPOSING THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS @a*o W*