The High Court · 2025

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia playls that in the tnerewitn' the High court may be circumstances stated in oleased to issue writ in the nature of Mandamus' declaring common Order Dt re No 3176/2044 in SA No 492t2o24 23l12t2o24passed in rn r'i" ii?ilioi+ 'nJ by Honorabte oeuts nec#[r'iri;unrr-i HvOerabad as illesal, arbitrary, without considering merits and t"tl "O againit the. princioles of natural justice' of imposing condition of payment of Rs orovisions of Sarfaesi n"t m iht "'t*ti 4.00 Crores in two installments' "?iil'ii-riLa IANO: 10 F 2025 Petition under Section 1 51 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support'"r't'L pltitiS"' lni nio.1 coyrt 11y P qlT::l]::tqv of depoiit.of Rs 4'00 crores imposed rn i'#;;;ii;;;nJ"r""i oiti'u the common order Dt ziiliioii" i"'i"o 'in lA No 3177i2024 and lA No "onoition i I I

3.17612044 in SA No 49212024 by Honorable Debts Hyderabad tiil the disposat of the preslnt W;i;;;;il" Counsel for the petitioners: SRI G.K. DESHPANDE Counset for the Respondents: SRI SRIN|VAS CHITTURU The Court made the following: ORDER Recovery Tribunal-l a l-: THE HON'BLE THE CIIIEF .IUSTICE ALOK ARADHE AND THE IION'BLE SRI JtISTI CE J. RAO IIIRIT PETITI ON No.172 of 2o25 ORDER: Fer the Hon'bte the ChieJ Justlce Alok Aradte) Mr. G.K.Deshpande, learned counsel for the petitioners Mr. Srinivas Chitturu, learned counsel for the respondents.

2. With the consent of the learned counsel for the parties, the writ petition is heard finally In this writ petition, the petitioners have assailed the 3. validity of the order dated 23' 12'2024 passed by the Debts Recovery Tribunal-I at Hyderabad (hereinafter referred to as the "Tribunal") in I'A'Nos'3177 and 3176 of 2024 it S.A.No.492 of 2024.

4. Facts giving rise to filing of this appeal briefly stated are that the petitioners had approached the respondents 2 bark (hereinafter referred to as, ,.the bank,) seeking a term loan of Rs.24.50 crores ald working capital of Rs.5"0O crores. Thereupon, the bank released a sum of Rs.23.45 crores of term loal and Rs.l.50 crores of working capital. The petitioners defaulted in payment of the amount of the 1oan.

5. Thereupon, the bank initiated the proceedings under the Securit.isation ald Reconstruction of Financizrl Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2OO2, and an e-auction sale notice for sale of immovabie/movable properties of the petitioners was issued on 29.06.2079 r.r,hich was published in the newspaper on Ol.CtZ.2019. The date of auction was tixed as 09.08.20.lg and

08.08.2019.

6. According to the petitioners, as per the compromise proposal dated 15.06.2019, the petitioners have paid a sum of Rs. l.50,OO,OO0/_ to the bank. In addition, a sum of Rs.0.50 crores was already paid by them. It is the case of the petitioners that they have paid a sum of Rs.7S.00 3 lakhs on two different occasions namely 08'08'2019 and 15.08.2019. According to the petitioners' they have paid'a sum of Rs.10.90 crores' The bank informed the petitioners that the One Time Settlement proposal submitted by the petitioners cannot be accepted and issued a sale notice dated 06.O9.2024.

7. The petitioners challenged the validity of the aforesaid sale notrce rn S.A.No.375 of 2024, which is pending before the Tribunal' While so' the bank has issued an e-auction sale notice dated 19 'Il '2024 published in the newspaper on 2O'll'2O24 fixing the date of auction as 24.12'2024 and it has also approached the learned III Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate at Hyderabad by filing Crl'M'P'No'1480 of 2024 wherein an order dated ll.ll'2024 was passed appointing an Advocate Commissioner for taking physical possession of the subject property' The petitioners have challenged the same by frling S'A No '492 of 2024' They have also hled I.A.Nos.3177and3:.T6aLeo24seekingstayoffurther proceedings. The Tribunal, by an order dated 23'12'2024' 4 stayed the confirmation of sale subject to the condition that the petitioners deposit a sum of Rs.2.oo crores on. or before 06.01.2025 and a further sum of Rs.2.OO crores 2O.O1.2025. Being aggrieved by the aforesaid c:ondition, the petitioners have already frled al appeal on 2Z .12.2024 before the Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunar (ht:reinafter referred to as, .,the Appellate Tribunal,,). However, since the chair person of the Apperlate Tribunar is on r<:ave, the petitioners have approached this Court. B. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that since the Chair person of the Appeliate Tribuned is on leave, the petitioners have approached this Court. 9. On thr: other hand, learned counsel for the b:mk has submitted that the petitioners have already approached the Appellate Tribunal.

10. It is a common ground that the Chair person of the Appellate Tribunal shall resume duties on Og.Oi.2O25. Y 5 ,l I I t

11. We have considered the rival submissions made on both sides and have perused the record'

12. The validity of the order d'ated 23'12'2024 passed by the Tribunal is already under challenge in an appeal preferred by the petitioners' Therefore, it is not necessa4/ for us to examine the validity of the same' However' to keep the lis alive between the parties, at this point of time' we deem it appropriate to modify the order dated 23.t2.2O24 passed by the Tribunal and extend the time of deposit of the amount as directed by the Tribunal by ten days and hfteen days respectively'

13. To the aforesaid extent, the order dated 23'12'2024 passed by the Tribunal is modified' It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion with regard to the merits of the matter, as its validity has to be examined in the appeal by the Appellate Tribunal'

14. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of 6 Miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shali stand closed. However, there shall be no order as to costs. //TRUE COPY// AssrsrANsr%fafl{{li SECTTON OFFTCER irTf tffi t*ri[:?]?l,fl 3u:3:"$#T:'"t"**" Bank oi eiiooa, Khairtabad Branch secretariat Road, To,

1. TheAuthorized Officr "Ei:ix,';,5'?ffi ^, I?:"?:i#anaser' i' 3$ BS EF F"i[LsJ-",1'Jsar?E d,1xff::iais;L " HIGH COURT DATED:06 t01t2025 ORDER WP.No.172 of 2025 ! i DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WTHOUT COSTS CC TODAY 1r\E S T{7u Aq o 0 6 J[]i ?025 z a ,5 * + , ,-rr.,r.r,'y- -a--:=:::5. '' .,i ?p>2