The High Court · 2025

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia praying that in the circlimstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate Writ declarrng GOtt/S No. 1 19 Home (General. A 2) Department dated 01111/2016 to the extent of Serial Nos. 3 of Annexure 2 attaching property situated at Registration and Sub- Registration District Nlahabubnagar, fVlahabubnagar [t4andal, Appannapally Grama Panchayat, Appannapally H/o Edira Village Limits, consisting of Land Survey No. 314/ e9 admeasuring Ac. 0-31 112 Gls. Hectares 0-31 112 and Survey No. 315/ e9 ei admeasuring Ac. 0-37 Gts. Hectares 0-37 and Survey No. d1l et. admeasuring Ac. 1-00 Gts. Hectares 0-40, total exlent Ac. 2-28 112 Gts. more particularly mentioned in the Schedule hereunder, m,:rtgaged in favour of Petitioner bank as illegal, arbitrary, contrary to law and consequently set aside the same and consequently permit the Petitioner bank to enforce its rights against the said property lA NO: 1 OF 2025 Petition under S;ection 151 CPC praying that in the r;ircumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition. the High Cou 1 may be pleased to stay GOMS No. .1 19 Home (General. A 2) Department datr:d 01/1 1/2016 to the extent of Serial Nos 3 of Annexure 2 Counsel for the Pet tic,ner: SRl. MANAV GECIL THOMAS Counsel for the Resp,rndent No.1: SRI MAHESH RAJE, AGP FOR HOME Counsel for the Re:;p,r6slsn1 No.2: Ms. T- SWETCHA, AGP :OR REVENUE Counsel for the Respondent No.3: SRI A. RAGHURAM MAHADEV, AGP FOR HOME, STATE OF ANDHRA PRADE:SH Counsel for the Respondent Nos.4to6:- The Court made the following: ORDER THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI APARESH KUMAR SINGH AND THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE G.M.MOHIUDDIN WRIT PETITION No.249O4 of 2o25 ORDER: Learned counsel Sri Manav Gecil Thomas appears for the petitioner. Sri Mzihesl'r Raje, learned Government Pleader lor l{ome, appears lor rcspondent No.1. Ms. T.Su etcha, lcarned Assistant Government Pleader for Rcrrcnne,:rppeerrs lor respondent No.2. Sri A.Raghuram Mahadev, learned Assistant Government Pleader for State of Andhra Pradesh, appears for resporrdent No.3.

2. Petitioner is thc [3ar-rk. r'r'ith whom certain immovable propertics described at paragraph 6 of the writ affidavit, falling ri ithin tl-rc tcrritorierl jurisdiction of the State ol Telangana, \\'erc mortgaged against the credit facility availed by private respondent No.4 year 2O 13. Private responclents No.5 and 6 are the guarantors. Out of thc mortgaged pr<,pertics. the immovable properties described at para 9,tf the u'rit - affidavit u,ere attached bv the Government 'of Andhra Pradesl-r uiCe G.O.Ms.llo.I 19, Homc (General-A2) Department, dated O 1. 1 1 .20 l6

3. Petitioner-Bank has initiated procccdin 1s, under the Recover-v ol' Debts and F3ankruptc-\'Act, 1<)93 l17,r sl-rort 'the Debt Recovery Act'), by filing O.A.No.3586 ol .2O17, which has been decreed on 30.12.'202.1 in its favour Pctitioner- Bank has aiso initiated proceedings under the Securitisation ald Reconstmction of Financia I Assets and Security Intelest Act, 2OO2 (for short 'thc SARFAIISI Act') by issuing demand noticc urrdel Section 13(21 on 15.06.20 15 and possession notice under liection 13(4) on 07.09.2C 15 to respondent No.4 / borr',tlr,er and respondents lrlo.5 and 6 /gua rantors.

4. Petitione r-Bank has assailed the attachrnent of the mortgaged properties ulde G.O.Ms.No.1 19, Honre (General- 42) Department, dated 01. 1 1.2016, issued by the State of Andhra Pradesh in exercise of pou'crs lrnder Section 3 ol' the Andhra Pradesh Protection of Depositors of Financial Establishments Act, 1999 (for short 'the Act of 1999').

5. Learned counsel lor the petitioner-Bank submits that the impugned action of the State of Andhra Pradesh is in violation of the SARFAtrSI Act. Reference is made to Sections 26tr and 35 thereol

6. Learned counsel for the pctitioner has referred to the decision rendered b_v a learned Single Bench of the Andhra Pradesh High Court in Canara Bank v. State of Andhra Pradesh, Department of Home (General), rep by its Principal Secretary fW.P.No.21O29 of 2Ol7 dated 18.06.2021], rlhereb-r' attachment of some of the mortgaged properties rr ith the petitioner-Bank under the Act of 1999 were set aside b1, a detailed judgment after referring to the provisions ol the Debt Recovery Act, SARFAESI Act and also the decisions rendered by the Apex Court and various other High Courts. However, the petitioner-Bank u'as permitted to proceed further against the referred properties undcr thc provisions of the SARFAESI Act for recovcrv of thr: debt. It is submitted that I the State of .{n dl-rra Pradesh has filed an appeirl. in wl-rich an order of s;latus quo has been granted b-r a learne d Division Bench of the High Court of Andhra Prarle sh. 7 . Learned r:ounsel for the petitioner submit:; that since the propertir:s were mortgaged r,"'ith the branr:h of the petitioner-Ba nl: situated in Hydcrabad, Stat,e of '[clangana, and the rnortgaged properties arc also :;ituated \\'ithin the territorial jr-rrirsdiction ol the State ol Tela igana, the jurisdiction of this Court has been invoked. B. Learned r:ounsel for the State of Andhrzr f 'r:ldesh has taken an objection to the maintainabilit-r r,l thc q'rit petitior-r beforr: this Court on the gror-rnd that tl-ie proceedings for attachtnent under the Act of 1999 have been initiated on the basis of criminal casq; instituted against the pri',,ate respondent No.4 lor cheatinll the small- titne depositors. Criminal case as well as ar-tachment proceedings under the Act of 1999 fall under the jurisdiction ol r.he Special Court created under tir:ction 6 ol the said Act. Reference is made to Sec[ion 7 ol the Act of 1999, rvhich provides a mechanism for lrr:aring the i objections and claims of persons interested in the property attached, before the interim attachment is made absolute. It is submitted that the petitioner has approgched this Court in 2025, while the order of attachment dates back to 0l . 1 1.2016. Petitioner has not rnade anv statement as to r,r,hether the attachment has bee n made absolute. It is further submitted that the Act of 1999 provides a remedy of appeal under Section l1 belore the High Court within thirty days of such order. [t is aiso submitted that the Speciai Court falls rvithin the superr.isory jurisdiction of the High Court of Andhra Pradesh. Petitioner-Banl( has also moved Andhra Pradesh High Court against such provisional attachment of the mortgage d properties and the subject matter is presentl.r, 1n appeal before a learned Division Bench ol the High Court of Andhra Pradesh.

9. Learned counsel for the State of Anclhra Pradesh also refers to Section 177 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short 'Cr.P.C.'), which prescribes jurisdiction of the concerned Criminal Court to be the place lvhere the cause of action lies. In such circum stances, it is 6 submitted that merely because the subje t. t- properties iie within the State of Telangana and the brar <:h ol petitioner Bank, u,l-rch advanced credit facilities also lies rvithin the State of Tt'langana, this Court s1-rould not orltertain such a claim. Therefore, the Writ Petition may be c ismisscd as not maintainalrlc.

10. Wc lrave considered the submission s oI Ieanrecl counsel for the parties, taken note of the r<'lr:vant material facts placerl on record and also the decisiorr rendcred b1'a learned Sir.rgle Bench of the High Court ol Pndhra Przrdesh in similar is;sue raised by the petitioner- Balrl<. . 1 I . We hzrve also gone through the provisions ol the Act of 1999, SARFAESI Act and the Debt Recoverl Act.

12. At the outset, we may observe that t he cause ol action for alSitating the grievance arises out r.rf attachment procee<1ings under Section 3 of Act of 1 99!), ir;suerd b.t the ()overnment of Andhra Pradesh uide G.O.Ms.N,t.I 19, Horne .) (Genera1,A2) Department, dated 01.11.2()16. Such attachment tf the subject properties rnortgzrged u,ith the 7 petitioner-Bank lies within the jurisdiction of the Special Court under the Act of 1999 and in respect ol which criminal cases have been instituted against .the private respondent No.4 lor defrauding small-time depositors

13. Section 7 of the Act of 1999 provides for a procedure to be foilowed by the Special Cou rt before the order of interim attachment is made absolute. The s'rit aflidavit does not contain arry averment as to ',r,hether the attachment has been made absolute bv the Special Court. Section 1 1 of the Act of 1999 also provides a remedy of appeal to an aggrieved person including the competent authority. The attachment proceedings are arising out of criminal proceedings initiated against the private respondent No.4 and others for defrauding small-time depositors and as such, the cause of action to such criminai proceedings also lies before the concerned court in terms of Section 177 of Cr.P.C. The High Court of Andhra Pradesh has the supervisory jurisdiction over such Special Court. The petitioner himself has approached the High Court of Andhra Pradesh against one such order of s attachment in February, 2017, in which the lr:arned "r'rit court has also granted relief. The said subje,:t matter is still lying in appeal belore the Division Bencl-t of the l{igh Court of Andtrra Pradesh. Merely because tlre: attached properties fall within the territorial jurisdiction ,rf the State of 'lelangar-ra, .,he petitioncr-Bank shor-rld not bc: alk;u,t:d to invoke the r.vrit jurisdiction ol this Court, r,r,lrcn lhc Act ol 1999 provides special procedure for marl<ing sucl-r attachmelrts. As such, the cause of action ans;ing out o[ such attachmcnt lies within the territorial ju risdiction ol tl-tr: High Court of Andhra Pradcsh. Thereforc. -\^/e aro not inclined to entertain the Writ Petition on ttr,: point ol jurisdiction

14. Hou'ever. the petitioner is at liberty to invoke appropriate pr-oceedings before the competent ,lourt having .jurisdiction

15. Tht: irrstant Writ Petition is, accordingly. dismissed. Hor.r'ever. there shall be no order as to costs i) Miscellaneous applications pending, il any, sl-rall stand closed. SD/. AHMED ABDULLA KHAN TANT REGISTRAR / //TRUE COPY' ECTION OFFICER To,

1. One CC to SRl. I\,IANAV GECIL THON/AS, Advocate [OPUC] 2. fwo CCs to GP FOR HOME ,High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad [OUT]

3. Two CCs to GP FOR HOME High Court for the State of Andhra Pradesh at Secretariat, Amaravathi [OUT]

4. Two CCs to GP FOR REVENUE High Court for the State of Telangana, at Hyderabad [OUT]

5. Two CD Copies TKSI BIV HIGH COURT DATED:2210812025 ORDER WP.No.24904 of 2025 4 .:---\ _ ,rr .'., -3 c t) [3 Nolj ro5 I sl-^'rCltr :1) \ DISMISSING THE WRIT PETITION WITHC)IJT COSTS o J L