The High Court · 2025

1. M / s. Shriram Finance Limited, (lt is informed that Shriram City Urion Finance Limited has been Amalgamated with Shriram Transport Eil?nce Limited as per order of NCLT, Chennai, Subsequently the name Of Shriram Transport Finance Limited was changed as Shriram Finance Limited with effect?rom 30.11.2022 vide Certificat,e of lncorporation pursuant to Change of name Dated 30.11.2022) having its Branch Office At D.No 44, Sarojini Devi Road, Secunderabad, Represented by its Authorized Officer'

2. M/s.shriram Finance Limited, Repres6nted by its Authorized Officer, Sri Towers, Plot No. 14,A, South Phase lndustrial Estate, Gunidy, Chennai-600 032, Tamil Nadu. Association, Ra.iendra Nagar, Ranga Reddy District.

3. Sri.f .Yeshwanth, Advocate Commissioner, C/o. Rajendra Nagar Court's Bar ...RES'ONDENTS Petrtion under Article 226 ol the Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a writ, order or direction, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the respondents '1 and 2 in invoking the provisions of sARFASEI Act against the property of the petitioners i.e., all that House bearing No.6-4-151 , Plot bearing No.49, admeasuring 200 sq. yards or '167.2 sq.meters in Survey No.4Bl 12, situated at Katedhan Village, presently Rajendra Nagar, Sub-District, Rajendra Nagar Municipality, Ranga Reddy District, as void, illegal and against Arbitration and conciliation Act, 1996 and the action of i -t1 1-7 Honourable Chief Judrcial lvlagistrate, Rajendra Nagar, Rarrlla Reddy District, in entertaining the application filed by the respondents 1 and 2 ir relation to the said property under Section 14 of SARFASEI Act and issuing arr order appointing the 3rd respondent as Advocate Commissioner to take physical possession, as illegal, void and against orders dated 02.04.2024 passed in Arbitration OP No.805 of 2015 by the Honourable XXIV Additional Chief Judge City Civil Court at Hyderabad by which the Award was set aside and conseq rently set aside the same as illegal. lA NO: 1 OF 2025 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the ci'cumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Cou'1 may be pleased to suspend the order dated 07.07.2025 passed in Crl.M.P.No.64 of 2025 by the Honourable Senior Civil Judge-cum-Chief Judicial Magistrale, Rajendra Nagar, Ranga Reddy District, in appointing the 3rd respon,lent as Advocate Commissioner to take ohysical possession of the property, perrding disposal of the Writ Petition. Counsel for the Petitioners: SRI P.RAVI SHANKER Counsel for the Respondents: -- The Court made the following: ORDER ..; $ /, THE HON'BLE JUSTICE MOUSHUMI BHATTACHARYA AND THE HON'BLE JUSTICE GADI PRAVEEN KUMAR IVRIT PETITION No.23982 OF 2o25 tr'lr.P.Ravi Shanker, learncd counsel for the petitioners. ORDER: (Per Hon'ble Jusrice Moushumi Bharracharya)

1. The subject matter of the present writ petition is a Vacant Notice' dated 30.O7.2025 issued by the Advocate Commissioner pursuant to lhe order passed by the learned Senior Civil Judge cum-Chief Judicial Magistrate, Rajendranagar on 07 .O7 .2025.

2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that the petitioners were issued a Possession Notice by the respondent No.1 under Section 13 (a) of The Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Inferesl AcL, 2OO2 (the SARFAESI Act, 2OO2l on 03.05.2024. Thc petitioncrs replied to the said notice on 27.O5.2O24.

3. Learned counsel further submits that the parties have appointed an Arbitrator on their own which resulted an Award in favour of the respondent No.4. The petitioners fi1ed an Arbi[ration O.P.No.805 of 2015 seeking to set aside of the Award hled under Section 34 of The Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (the 1996 Act )dated 31.03.2015 which was allowed by the XXIV Additional Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad. 2 IIIB,J & GPK,J trr.P. IYo.23982 OF 2O25 tt. i:a'l t, Thereafter, the respondents have failed to cha krnge the order passed in Arbitration O.P.No.805 of 2015. Accor<ling to learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, the posscsision Notice and the proceedings initiated by thc respondents plrrsuant to the setting asidc of the Award is contrary to law.

4. It is evident from the above facts and the documents on record [hat the petitioners were scrved Notice b1, thc respondent No.l undcr Section 13 (4) of the SARFAESI Act, 2002 on O3.O5.2O24 . The Au,ard was set aside beforc the notice was serwed on O2.O4.2O24. Hence, there is nothing ;treventing the petitioners from challenging the possession Notice dated

03.O5.2024 before the competent statutory forlrm. The statutory forum is the Debts Recovery Tribuna (DRT) under Section 17 (1) of the SARFAEST ltcL,2OO2.

5. The petitioners have admittedly not availed the alternative eflicacious statutory remedy which rvzrs available to them. The petitioners have instcad hled this u,rir petition after a considerable delay frorn the Notrce of the possession and on the order passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate ar Ilajendranagar in Crl.M.P.No.64 of 2025 on 07.OZ.2O2S.

6. More importantlv the petrLioners have no: shown any of the exceptions rvhich ri,ould pcrsuade us to invcl<e the powers ..t f1 1*ry/ MB,J & GPK,J W.P. I{o.23982 OF 2O25 under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to interfere where there is efficacious alternative statLrtory remedy available to the pelitioners. The petitioners shall be at liberty to take all points including of the Arbitral A'n ard before the statutory forum. Neeclless lo say, the petitioners shall be at liberty of approaching the statutory forum.

7. W.P.No.23982 of 2025 (wrongly typed as 2023) is accordingly dismissed in terms of the above. All connected applications, if any, shall stand closed. Tl-rere shall be no order as [o costs. //TRUE COPY// SD/.S. MALLIKARJUNA RAO ANT REGISTRAR AS SECTION OFFICER / One CC to SRI P.RAVI SHANKER, Advocate [OPUC] Two CD Copies To 1 2 PSK. LS Yk I _! 1 HIGH COURT DATED:1410812025 ORDER WP.No.23982 of 2025 DISMISSING THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS 4 ."dnA k* t t I -d.ra ,zjjrr rHE ;^14 r4 o \\ B 6 lt0u M -Cr; Da-Ir;lF_O I