Proceeding Sheet vs Bank Of India And Others [(2016) 3 ...
2022 Latest Caselaw 4384 AP

        HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI

MAIN CASE No.: W.P.Nos.20892 & 4466 of 2022

                             PROCEEDING SHEET

Sl.No
                                               ORDER

DATE

4. 21.7.2022 CPK, J & TRR, J

Heard Sri S.V. Muni Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner, and Sri Sreedhar Valiveti, learned counsel for the respondent bank.

A perusal of the record would indicate that the petitioner herein filed S.A.No.273 of 2017 before Debts Recovery Tribunal, Visakhapatnam along with I.A.No.1185 of 2017 questioning the possession notice dated 01.07.2017. In the said case, an interim order came to be passed directing the petitioner herein to deposit the rent in the respondent bank. It appears that subsequently, the said S.A. itself was rejected, which came to be challenged before this Court in W.P.No.4466 of 2022. Subsequently, the Proclamation of Sale-cum-e-auction of sale dated 18.06.2022 came to be challenged before this Court in W.P.No.20892 of 2022.

Sri S.V. Muni Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner, contends that since the petitioner, who is the lessee, is in possession of the property, any action to be taken to evict the petitioner from the property shall only be in accordance with the provisions of the Act and not by invoking the provisions of SARFAESI Act. He relied upon a judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in Vishal N. Kalsaria vs. Bank of India and others [(2016) 3 SCC 762].

However, Sri Sreedhar Valiveti, learned counsel for the respondent bank, would submit that the bank has taken the physical possession of the property long back and that the allegations made in the affidavit that the said premises is being used to run a school and that the school is still functioning are incorrect. According to him, the averments in the affidavit made to that effect are all false. In view of the above, he would submit that the auction scheduled to take place tomorrow requires no interference.

The issue urged by learned counsel for the petitioner may require hearing, but at the same time, it may not be proper for this Court to stay the auction while directing the petitioner to deposit the rent amount in the respondent bank, as directed by the Debts Recovery Tribunal, Visakhapatnam.

Hence, the auction scheduled on 22.07.2022 shall go on but the same shall not be finalized for a period of three (3) weeks.

List on 04.08.2022.

Meanwhile, counter if any, shall be filed.

___________ CPK, J

___________ TRR, J Note:-

Furnish C.C. tomorrow.

B/O MS/AMD