Citation : 2024 Latest Caselaw 6776 AP
Judgement Date : 6 August, 2024
APHC010332492024 Bench Sr.No:-7
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
[3443]
AT AMARAVATI
WRIT PETITION No.16950 of 2024
Gongada Hari Babu and another ...Petitioners
Vs.
Union of India and others ...Respondents
**********
Pasalapudi Satya Haritha, Advocate for the petitioners.
CORAM : THE CHIEF JUSTICE DHIRAJ SINGH THAKUR SRI JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA
DATE : 6th August, 2024
PC:
The petitioners are aggrieved of the notice issued by the Advocate
Commissioner seeking to take possession of the property in possession of the
petitioners, who are the principal borrowers with M/s. Sriram Finance Limited
- respondents herein, on the ground that the Advocate Commissioner in her
notice had not properly and exactly defined the schedule property which would
authorize her to take action to evict the petitioners from the property in
question.
HCJ & NJS,J WP_16950_2024
2. In our opinion, these issues do not fall under any of the
exceptions as crystallized by the Apex Court in the judgment rendered in
Radha Krishan Industries v. State of Himachal Pradesh [(2021) 6 SCC
771]. Further, considering the ratio of the judgment in PHR Invent
Educational Society v. UCO Bank [2024 SCC Online SC 528], we do not
deem it appropriate to invoke the extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 226 of
the Constitution of India and leave the petitioners free to avail the alternate
remedy before the Debts Recovery Tribunal.
3. The Writ Petition is, accordingly, disposed of. No order as to
costs.
Miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed.
DHIRAJ SINGH THAKUR, CJ
NINALA JAYASURYA, J
Vjl
Publish Your Article
Campus Ambassador
Media Partner
Campus Buzz
LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026
LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!