Telangana High Court
Mrs. Y. Swetha Goud vs The State Of Telangana on 13 June, 2025
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K.SARATH
WRIT PETITION No.13945 of 2025
ORDER:
Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and learned
Assistant Government Pleader for Stamps and Registration
appearing for the respondents and perused the entire
material on record. With their consent, this writ petition is
disposed of at the stage of admission.
2. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that this
writ petition is filed by the petitioner declaring the action of
the respondent No.4 in refusing to register the sale
certificate dated 24.01.2025 issued by the respondent No.5-
Bank as illegal, arbitrary and in gross violation of
Judgment passed by the Division Bench of this Court in
City Union Bank Limited v. The Sub-Registrar,
Peddapalli, and others 1 and P.Swarnalatha v. The
State of Telangana2 and in violation of Article 21 and
300-A of Constitution of India and Principles of Natural
Justice and set aside the same consequently direct the
1 2018 (5) ALT 279
2 Judgment in W.P.No.4949 of 2019,
dated 11.03.2019 passed by the High
Court for the State of Telangana.
SK, J
WP_13945_ 2025
respondent No.4 to forthwith register the Sale Certificate
dated 24.01.2025 issued by respondent No.5-Bank under
the Provisions of Securitization and Reconstruction of
Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act,
2002 (for brevity, 'the SARFAESI Act, 2002'), in favour of
the petitioner in respect of property i.e., residential Flat
No.B-103, on First Floor of "The Windsor Apartment"
admeasuring 2,200 square feet, constructed on all those
pieces and parcels of land in the premises bearing
Municipal No.1-11-251/A/103 situated at Begumpet
Village, Balanagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District.
3. Learned Counsel for the petitioner further submits
that the respondent No.5-Bank had sanctioned credit
facility to M/s. S.S. Infrastructure Development
Consultants Limited and on various accounts. M/s. S.S.
Infrastructure Development Consultants Limited and its
guarantors including one of its Director Mr.Palle Seshagiri
Rao failed to repay the loan amounts and due to non-
payment of the loan amount, the respondent No.5-Bank
issued notice to the defaulters under Section 13 (2) of the
SARFAESI Act, 2002. In spite of that, M/s. S.S.
SK, J
WP_13945_ 2025
Infrastructure Development Consultants Limited not repaid
the amounts. In view of the same, the respondent No.5-
Bank proceeded under the SARFAESI Act, 2002 and took
possession of the secured assets and a possession notice
was issued on 25.06.2024. Thereafter, the respondent
No.5-Bank issued notice for sale of secured assets in the
account of M/s. S.S. Infrastructure Development
Consultants Limited on 26.07.2024 and also conducted E-
Auction on 27.12.2024 and the same was published in the
newspapers.
4. Learned Counsel for the petitioner further submits
that the petitioner participated in the E-Auction conducted
on 27.12.2024 and submitted her bid for the schedule
property and deposited full price of Rs.1,21,30,400/- with
the respondent No.5-Bank, upon which a Sale Certificate
was issued on 24.01.2025 in accordance with the
SARFAESI Act, 2002. The respondent No.4 refused to
register the sale certificate issued by the respondent No.5-
Bank pursuant to the sale held by it under the provisions of
the SARFAESI Act, 2002, on the ground that an attachment
order was passed by the Deputy Registrar of Chits/
SK, J
WP_13945_ 2025
Arbitrator, Hyderabad (South), in I.A.No.115 of 2024 in
ABR/CF/No.168 of 2024, dated 30.03.2024 in relation to
the said flat, which is the subject matter of the sale
certificate issued by respondent No.5-Bank, the said action
of the respondent No.4 is illegal and arbitrary.
5. Learned Counsel for the petitioner further submits
that the said action of the respondents is contrary to the
orders passed by the Division Bench of this Court in City
Union Bank Limited v. The Sub-Registrar, Peddapalli
(Supra-1) and the said orders are followed by this Court in
W.P.No.5353 of 2023, dated 08.04.2025 and requested to
pass similar orders in this matter also.
6. Learned Counsel for the petitioner further submits
that the respondent No.6-Margadarshi Chit Fund Private
Limited, Ameerpet, Hyderabad addressed a letter to the
respondent No.5 on 19.11.2024 stating that in the event of
property is being auctioned by the Bank subject to the
attachment of the subject property, after adjusting the sale
proceeds of the subject property towards dues of the Bank,
the balance sale proceeds if any, shall be paid to the
Margadarshi Chit Fund Private Limited. The Margadarshi
SK, J
WP_13945_ 2025
Chit Fund Private Limited advised the Bank not to
release/pay the balance proceeds, if any, to the owner of
the property, as the subject property is under attachment.
7. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Stamps
and Registration is not disputing the orders passed by this
Court in W.P.No.5353 of 2023, dated 08.04.2025 and
requested to pass appropriate orders.
8. In view of the above circumstances, the writ petition is
disposed of directing the registering authority to receive and
release the sale certificate dated 24.01.2025 issued by the
respondent No.5 in favour of the petitioner without
reference to the orders in I.A.No.115 of 2024 in
ABR/CF/No.168 of 2024, dated 30.03.2024 passed by the
Deputy Registrar of Chits/Arbitrator, Hyderabad (South). If
any balance amount remains, the respondent No.5 is
directed to pay the amount to the respondent No.6 as per
the order in I.A.No.115 of 2024 in ABR/CF/No.168 of 2024,
dated 30.03.2024 passed by the Deputy Registrar of
Chits/Arbitrator, Hyderabad (South). However, there shall
be no order as to costs.
SK, J
WP_13945_ 2025
9. Miscellaneous Petitions, if any, pending in this writ
petition shall stand closed.
_____________________
JUSTICE K.SARATH
Dated: 13.06.2025
spk
