The High Court · 2025

Mr. M. Sampath Kumar, S/o Venkataiah, aged 55 years, Occ: E usiness, R/o H.No.8- 12-80, Pinnavari Street, PNB Lane, JPN Road, Warangal-506 ('02 TG ...IMPLEAD PETITIONER/PR()I'OSED RESP NO 3 AND

1. M/s. Chelpuru Brothers Cloth Stores, Rep. by its Managing Part1e.ry, Chelpuru Harish Kumar & Chelpuru Shashi Kiran Rl/o H.No. 8-10-16' Besides Ashok Electricals, JPN Road, Warangal, TG

2. Chelpuru Harish Kumar, S/o. Ch. Hema Kumar, Occ. Business, aged 36 yeari, R/o. H.No.1 5-7-48, Ramannapet, Warangal.TG

3. Chelpuru Shashi Kiran, S/o. Ch. Anand Kumar, Occ. Business, aged 30 years, Rl/o H.No.1 5-7-48, Ramannapet, Warangal. ...PETITIONE FIS/RESP NO.1 TO 3

4. The Union Bank of lndia, (Erstwhile Andhra Bank), Rep. by its Authorised Officer, Zonal Office, Fathima Nagar, L. Catholic, WaraLngal - 506004 TG 5. The Union Bank of lndia (Erstwhile Andhra Bank), AFIE} Branch, Rep. by its Authorised Office, ARM Branch, Hyderabad.

6. S. Kavitha, W/o. not known Aged about: Major, Advo,;ette Commissioner appointed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate Warangal ...RESPONDENTS Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the ciroumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Coui. may be pleased to IMPLEAD the petitioner as Respondent No.4 in the array c,f the respondents in present Writ Petition No. 2O7 28 12025 Counsel for the Petitioner: Smt. V UMA DEVI Counsel for the Respondent No.2: SRI HEMANTH KUMAR \/EMURI Counsel for the Proposed Respondent: SRI G.K DESHAPANDE The Court made the following: ORDER THE HON'BLE JUSTICE MOUSHUMI BHATTACT{ARYA AND THE HON'BLE JUSTICE B.R.MN)HUSUDHAI\I :RAO WRIT PETITION No.2O728 OF 2025 Smt. V.Uma Devi, learned counsel for the petitioners. Sri Hemanth Kumar Vemllri, learned coutrsel appearing for the rcspondent N').2. Sri C.K.Deshprnde, Advocate appearing for the auction purchaser. ORDER: (Per Hon'ble Justice Moushumi Bhattacharya)

1. The Writ Petition assails an ordcr of thc learneci Chief Judicial Magistrate, Warangal, dated 01.02.2025 in Crl'M.P.l'1o.17 of '2025, appointing an Advocate Commissioner (the respondent No.3) to take physical possession of the petitioners' schedule proper[5' and to hand over the same to t.hc respondent No.2 (Bank). The r,:s;pondent No.2 (Bank) was the petitioner in Crl.M.l'.No.l7 of 2025 belore the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Warangal.

2. The pe titioners claim to be the principal borrowers of a loan taken from the respondent No.2 (Bank) in March, 2017. Although learned counsel appearing lor the petitioncrs has taken us throllgh a series of facts starting from March 2017 to Jullr lg25 and the prrlceedings hled by the petitioners related to thc loan, we firrd that :ounsel for the petitioners has not shown thc documents which art: relevant f<rr adjudication of the Writ Petition. These facts have been lrrought to the notice by learncd c<>unsel appearing for [he respondent llo.2 (Bank). 2 M8,1 & ORMR) wo-m728 m2S

3. According to counsel, the petitioners filed I.A.No.63l of 2025 itr S.A.No.93 of 2025 for the same relief as is prayed before this Court that is against the appointment of the Advocate Commissioner for taking possession of the schedule property, before the Debts Recovery Tribunal-I, Hyderabad. We have perused the docket order dated

21.03.2025 passed in the said I.A. in S.A. filed by the petitioners herein. The docket order dated 2L.O3.2025 states that the petitioners had earlier filed two S.A.'s (S.A.Nos'93 of 2022 and 276 of 20221 challenging the steps initiated by the respondent No.2 (Bank) for taking physical possession of the property. The docket order also records that S.A.No.276 of 2022 was dismissed by an order of the Tribunal dated

05.09.2023. S.A.No.93 ol 2022 filed by the petitioners for challenging the auction conducted by the respondent No.2 (Bank) was dismissed by the Debts Recovery Tribunal-l, Flyderabad, dated 1O.O2.2O25' The Tribunal lurther recorded that since the auction has already been conducted and confirmed, the respondent No.2(Bank) was at liberty to take steps for taking physical possession of the schedule property'

4. The impugned order passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Warangal is in consequence of the steps initiated by the Bank pursuant to the order of the Debts Recovery Tribunal-I, Hyderabad, dated 2 1.O3.2025.

5. Admittedly, the petitioners has not cha-llenged the docket order a)qa Zf .OS.ZO25 before thc Appellate Tribunal under section.18 of the ,/-/ \ \ 3 MBJ & BRMR) wp_20728_2025 SecuritisationandReconstructionofFinancialAssetsitrtdEnforcement of Security Interest Act (SARFAESI) Act, 2OO2 ' informed that another I-A. i.e., I.A'No'1669 of 2025 in S'A' No' 93 of 2025 fied. by t1le petitioners before the DRT-I was also clismissed by the I'h c Court is also DRT.Idatedo|.o7.2o2S.TheCourtisinformedthattheaforesaidl.A. was frled for the same relief i.e', for stay of all further proceedings including dispossession of the petitioners in respect 'rf the schedule property pursuant to extension of warrant of th r Chief J udicial Magistrate, Warangal, dated 01.02 2025 in Crl'M'P'No' I 7of 2O25' It may be reiterated that the Writ Petition challenges the same 6. warrant passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Vr'arangal' dated oL.o2.2025.

7. The petitioners have not brought any of ti'<: exceptions for intervention of this Court with regard to the excepti<'r s settled by the Supreme court clespite existence of an adequate alte -rLative efficacious remedy. In this case, the petitioners remedy is availttl'le under section 18 ofThe SARFAESI Act,2OO2-

8. We hence do not hnd any merit in the Writ Petiti<:'n' l'eave is given to ttre petitioners to approach the appropriate sta trrt ory foruln' if so advised. I I 4 f Ml,r & BRMR,I .;,' wp_20728_2025

9. We have not heard Mr.G.K.Deshpande, Advocate appearing for the auction purchaser/implead petitioner since the auction purchaser is yet to be made a party to the Writ Petition.

10. W.P.No.20728 of 2025, along with all connected applications, is accordingly dismissed. The interim orders, if any, shall stand vacated. There shall be no order as to costs. SD/- AHMED ABDULLA KHAN ASSISTANT REGISTRAR @ SECT@N OFFICER //TRUE COPYII I To,

1. One CC to SMT. V UMA DEV| Advocate tOpUCI 2. One CC to SRI G.K DESHPANDE Advocate tOpUCl 3. One CC to SRI HEMANTH KUMAR VEMURT Advocate IOPUCI 4. Two CD Copies KKS PVLw \ \ \ t HIGH COURT DATED:3010712025 ORDER WP.No.20728 of 2025 i,, t .L 27 rii ftft 1 ,) ./: /.,/ DISMISSING THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS c cd?ceNt*