Smt.M.Padma Sree vs The State Bank Of India And 9 Others
2021 Latest Caselaw 2593 Tel

         HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE A.RAJASHEKER REDDY
                          AND
              HON'BLE JUSTICE G.SRI DEVI

                 Writ Petition No.22370 OF 2021

JUDGMENT:(per Hon'ble Sri Justice A.Rajasheker Reddy)

      This Writ Petition is filed assailing the action of the 1st

respondent in issuing Auction Sale notice of subject Immovable

properties dated 27.08.2021 scheduled to be held on 18.09.2021

as illegal and arbitrary and contrary to Section 31(i) of the

Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and

Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (For short 'the Act of

2002') consequently to declare the petitioner's agricultural land

in Sy.No.36/A/3 admeasuring Acs.5.03 guntas situated at

Gopanpally village, Serilingampally Mandal, in the limits of

GHMC, Ranga Reddy District is not a government land as per

Section 58 of Telangana Land Revenue Act, 1317b Fasli.

Heard Sri C.Hanumantha Rao, learned counsel for the

petitioner, who submits that the subject property is an

agricultural property and it is exempted from the provisions of

the Act of 2002 as per Section 31(i) of the Act of 2002 and he

filed registered sale deeds in respect of the same. He also

submits the OTS application filed by the petitioner on 29.06.2021

was rejected and the petitioner also filed another application on

08.08.2021, which is pending.

On the other hand, Sri M.Srikanth Reddy, learned Standing

counsel for the respondent submits that at the time of obtaining

loan, the petitioner declared the subject property as commercial

property and that she has not stated the same in the writ

petition, which is suppression of fact and on this ground alone,

the writ petition is liable to be dismissed. He also submits that

the petitioner has also filed W.P.No.9928 of 2021, which was

disposed of on 23.04.2021, but the same is also not mentioned

in the affidavit filed in support of this writ petition, as such, no

exception can be taken and sought for dismissal of the writ

petition.

In this case, it is to be seen that the learned counsel for the

petitioner has not disputed that a declaration is filed by the

petitioner stating that the subject property is a commercial

property, but however states that just because it is declared as

commercial property by petitioner, it cannot be treated so unless

it is strictly so. More over, the government is also claiming rights

over the subject property and no useful purpose would be served

if any auction is taken in respect of the subject property, as the

third party rights will be involved in the property.

Admittedly, petitioner has alternate remedy under Section

17 of the Act of 2002 against the impugned proceedings. Since

there is a dispute with regard to the subject property as to its

nature, we refrain ourselves from going into the merits of the

matter, as we are relegating the petitioner to avail alternate

remedy. As regards prayer for declaration that the subject land

is not government land is concerned, that is a separate cause of

action and petitioner cannot agitate the same in the present writ

petition and it is open for him to challenge the same in

accordance with law.

Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of granting liberty

to the petitioner to avail alternate remedy under Section 17 of

the Act of 2002, if she is so advised.

There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel thereto,

miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this Writ Petition, shall

stand closed.

_________________________ A.RAJASHEKER REDDY, J

______________ G. SRI DEVI, J Date:15.09.2021 tk/kvs

HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE A.RAJASHEKER REDDY AND HON'BLE JUSTICE G.SRI DEVI

Writ Petition No.22370 OF 2021

Date: 15.09.2021

tk/kvs