APHC010519072024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI WRIT PETITION NO: 26928 of 2024 Bench Sr.No:-4 [3575] The South Indian Bank Limited ...Petitioner Vs. The State of A.P. and others ...Respondent(s) ********** CORAM: HON’BLE MRS JUSTICE LISA GILL HON’BLE MR JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA DATE : 15th APRIL, 2026 Present: Mr. Ambadipudi Satyanarayana, Senior Advocate (Video Conferencing) representing Ms. Ch. Laxmi Chaya, Advocate for Petitioner. Government Pleader for Stamps and Registration, for Respondent No.2. Ms. K. Vijayeswari, Assistant Government Pleader representing Mr. Sanku Durga Ramachandra Rao, Advocate for Respondent Nos.3 to 5. None appeared for Respondent Nos.1, 6 and 7. LISA GILL, J. 1. This Writ Petition has been filed by petitioner-bank, M/s. The South Indian Bank Limited, with a grievance that, upon death of borrower, Smt. Kancherla Rushendra Mani, guarantor to Mortgage Deed, her legal representatives partitioned the property and a Partition Deed was registered by Respondent No. 2 on 06.02.2024. 2 WP No.26928 of 2024 Date: 15.04.2026 2. It is submitted that such a Partition Deed should be cancelled, as it has been registered without specific consent of bank, in whose favour property in question was mortgaged on 05.09.2018, for loan facility taken on 24.08.2018. 3. Counter has been filed by respondents. In the counter filed on behalf of Respondent Nos. 3 to 5, by way of specific affidavit of Respondent No. 4, Deepthi Saggurthi, duly authorized to depose on behalf of Respondent Nos. 3 to 5, it is stated that partition among legal heirs does not create any new title or extinguish prior mortgage, and that mortgage created in favour of petitioner- bank remains intact and enforceable. Therefore, this Writ Petition should be dismissed. 4. Learned counsel representing Respondent Nos. 3 to 5 reiterates their stand that mortgage created in favour of bank remains intact and enforceable and is not in any manner affected by creation of Partition Deed. 5. Learned counsel for Respondent No. 2 points out that, in counter filed on behalf of Respondent No.2 as well, it is stated that validity of mortgage deed is not affected in any manner by way of partition carried out pursuant to execution of Will of deceased, Smt. Kancherla Rushendra Mani. 6. We have heard learned counsel for parties and have perused the record with their able assistance. 7. In view of facts and circumstances above, especially the stand of respondents, grievance raised by petitioner-bank does not survive. At this stage, learned counsel for Respondent Nos. 3 to 5 points out that efforts have been made to settle the account with petitioner-bank which has offered a settlement on 31.03.2026, and the process is underway. Be that as it may, the same cannot be a ground for continuation of present proceedings and parties are at liberty to arrive at any mutually acceptable settlement. 3 WP No.26928 of 2024 Date: 15.04.2026 8. In light of facts and circumstances stated above, specific stand of respondents, this Writ Petition is disposed of as infructuous. Parties are at liberty to arrive at any mutually acceptable settlement. This order does not preclude petitioner-bank from pursuing subsequent proceedings under SARFAESI Act. 9. Pending application(s), if any, stand(s) disposed of, accordingly. (LISA GILL) JUDGE (NINALA JAYASURYA) JUDGE Date: 15.04.2026 MS 4 WP No.26928 of 2024 Date: 15.04.2026 HON’BLE MRS JUSTICE LISA GILL HON’BLE MR JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA W.P.No.26928 of 2024 Date: 15.04.2026 MS