Yekollu Pavan Kumar Reddy vs The Branch Manager
2022 Latest Caselaw 1153 AP

        HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI

MAIN CASE No.: W.P.No.5180 of 2022
                                   PROCEEDING SHEET

Sl.
                                            ORDER

No DATE

2. 03.03.2022 CPK, J & VS,J Learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that when the matter is ceased by the civil Court, the question of initiation of proceedings under SARFAESI Act would be improper and incorrect. In other words, he argues that the substantial rights of the parties will be affected, if the property is taken away due to default by one of the members of the family.

Sri S.Satyanarayana Moorthy, learned counsel for the 1st respondent-Bank opposed the same stating that the issue involved in this case is covered by the Judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Jagdish Singh vs. Heeralal and others ((2014) 1 SCC 479).

At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the Judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court will not apply to the case of hand and that the matter requires adjudication.

Hence, status quo obtaining as on today shall be maintained till 09.03.2022.

Post on 09.03.2022.

It is made clear that no further adjournment will be granted from that date.

__________ CPK, J

_________ VS, J ARR