Maddali Sri Sai Venkata Satyanarayana, Sio. Late Babu Raja Venkata v. Hyderabad
Case at a glance
Outcome
Disposed of
Accordingly, the Writ Appeal is disposed of by reserving
Provisions considered
Key paragraphs
- Para 44. Accordingly, the Writ Appeal is disposed of by reserving liberty to the appellants to file appropriate applications for stay and preponement of the appeal before the appellate Tribunal. We have no doubt that if such applications are filed, the appellate Tribunal will consider the…
Judgment
Maddali Sri Sai Venkata Satyanarayana, Sio. Late Babu Raja Venkata Krishna Rao Aged.65 years, bcc. Ajriculture, Fl/o.H.No.6-88, Punadipadu' Kanchipadu Mandat, Kriihna District, Andhra Pradesh.
Smt lvladdali Vanaja Rani, Wo. Maddali Sri Sai Venkata Satyanarayana Aged.60 years, O6c.Housewife, Rl/o.H.No.6-88, Punadipadu, Kanchipadu Mandal, Krishna District, Andhra Pradesh. ...APPELLANTS AND 1 The State Bank of lndia, Stressed Assets Management Branch, Kachiguda' Hyderabad, rep. by its Chief General Manager. Mallela Himabindu, W/o.sulapani C/o.Rajyalakshmi Hospital, Sushma Sai^ Nigar Colony, Vanasthalipurbm Road, N6ar Sushma Theatre, Beside SRO- guilding, Drawakamayee i\agar Colony, Vanasthalipuram, Hyderabad - 500 070. 2 ...RESPONDENTS lA NO: 1 OF 2025 Petition under section 1 51 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 not to dispossess the petitioners from the Plot No.21 and 20(P), admeasuring 335 sq.yds situated in Sy.No.50, Saheb Nagar Khurd, Hayathnagar Mandal, Vanasthalipuram, R.R.District, pending disposal of the Writ Appeal counsel for the Appellants: sRl VEDULA SRINIVAS REPRESENTING FOR SRl. VEDULA CHITRALEKHA l I Counsel for the Respondents: None appeared The Court made the following: ORDER THE HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE SUJOY PAUL AND THE HON'BLE SMT. .IUSTICE RENUIIA YARA WRIT APPEAL No.438 of 2025 JUDGMENT (Per the Hon'ble the Acting Chtef Justice Sujoy Paul): Heard Sri Vedula Srinivas, learned Senior Counsel representing Ms. Vedula Chitralekha, learned counsel for the appellants
2. During the course of hearing, learned Senior counsel for the appellants fairly submitted that against the order dated
05.03.2025 passed by the Debts Recovery Tribunal-Il aL Hyderabad, the appellants' appeal is admittedly pending before the Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal, Kolkata (for short, ' the appellate Tribunal'). However, the appellate Tribunal needs to hear the appellalts on the question of waiver of deposit. Till such time the said question is decided and the appellants' interim prayer is considered by the appellate Tribunal, the appellants may be protected. He further submits that the appellants will forthwith file applications for stay and preponement of the appeal before the appellate Tribunal and till such time the said applications are decided, the appellants may be protected. \ 2 3 . In ou r opinion, learned Single Judge decliried interference in V/.p.Ne.19600 of 2025 on the basis of a recent judgment of Supleme Court in phr Invent Educationalt Society v. Uco Bankr. I' the impugned order dated 09.04.2025 passed by the learned Slngle Judge is tested on the envil of principles laid down in Phr Invent Educational Society (supra , we are inclined to observe that the learned Single Judge has taken a plausible view Thus, no interference is warranteC. The appellants' appeiel is admittedly pending consideration b efore the appellate Tribunal.
The appellalts will be at libertv 1o file stay application and ztcplication for preponement of the appe al before the appellate Triltunal. So far, question of grant of inte.-im relief for interregnum period is concerned, the curtains ar e finally drawn on this aspect by the Supreme Court in Kalabharati Advertising v. Hemant Vimalnath Narichaniaz uht:rein, in paragraph No.2l2. the Supreme Court has opined as undrrr:- "22. It :s a sel tled legal proposition that the ftrrurn of the rvrit court cannot be used for the purpose of giving inr-erim relief as the only and the fin al relief to any lrtigant. If the court comes to the conclusion that the matter requires acljudication by sorn,: other appropriate forum and relegates the sa. d party to that forum, it shoulci not grant any inte rim relief in favour of such a litigant for '11zoza1 + s.c.R. s+r '1zoro1s scc aaz I I ,,',. 3 an interregnum period till the said party approaches the alternative forum and obtains interim relief.
(Vide State of Onssa v. Madan Gopal Rtngta [1951 SCC 1024 : AIR 1952 SC 12] , Amarsarjit Singhv. State of Punjab [AIR 1962 SC 13051 , State of Orissa v. Ram Chandra Deu [AIR 1964 SC 6851 , Src,e of Biharv. Rambalak Singh "Balak" [AIR 1966 SC 1441 : 1966 Cri LJ 1076] and Premier Automobiles Ltd. v. Kamlekar Shantaram Wadkel(1976) 1 SCC 496 : 1976 SCC (L&S) 70 : AIR 1975 sC 22381.)" In this vie'*, of the matter, no interim relief is due to the appellants
Operative part
Accordingly, the Writ Appeal is disposed of by reserving liberty to the appellants to file appropriate applications for stay and preponement of the appeal before the appellate Tribunal. We have no doubt that if such applications are filed, the appellate Tribunal will consider the same in accordance with law. No costs. Interlocutory applications, if any pending, shall also stand closed. //TRUE COPY// SD/.M.MANJULA EPUTY REGISTRAR SECTION OFFIGER To,
1. The Chief General Manager, State Bank of lndia, S Management Branch, Kachiguda, Hyderabad Ssed ASSETS
2. One CC to SRl. VEDULA CHITRALEKHA Advocate [OPUC] 3. Two CD Copies KKS LS HIGH COURT DATED:21 10412025 ,i il I ii;\ 2[25 '., t DE o a,I{ lYr S 'rC -) -b ^r ORDER WA.No.438 of 2025 DISPOSING THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS ,llN' i I I I i I I
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: Accordingly, the Writ Appeal is disposed of by reserving
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Code of Civil Procedure, 1908.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.