APHC010114272025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3331] THURSDAY, THE SIXTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI WRIT PETITION NO: 5723/2025 Between: 1. NERELLA SURYAKALA, W/O LATE NERELLA APPALA SWAMY HINDU, AGED 63 YEARS RESIDING AT FLAT NO. 504, SWARNA PLAZA, DHARAM KARAM ROAD, AMEERPET, HYDERABAD-500 016 2. SRI NERELLA RAM KUMAR, S/O LATE NERELLA APPALA SWAMY, HINDU, AGED 43 YEARS, RESIDING AT FLAT NO. 504, SWARNA PLAZA, DHARAM KARAM ROAD, AMEERPET, HYDERABAD-500 016 3. SMT. KAMANA UMA DEVI,, W/O KAMANA SRINIVASA RAO, D/O LATE NERELLA APPALA SWAMY, HINDU, AGED 44 YEARS RESIDING AT H.NO. 58-22-35/11, SATYARAJ RESIDENCY, BUTCHIRAJUPALEM, GOPALAPATNAM, VISAKHAPATNAM-530 027. ...PETITIONER(S) AND 1. STATE BANK OF INDIA, REP. BY MANAGING DIRECTOR/CEO, CORPORATE OFFICE, STATE BANK BUILDING, VIDYA BHAVAN MARG, NAREEMANI POINT, MUMBAI, MAHARASHTRA STATE-400 021. 2. STATE BANK OF INDIA, REGIONAL OFFICE, REP. BY ZONAL MANAGER, REGIONAL OFFICE, BALAJI NAGAR, SIRIPURAM, VISAKHAPATNAM. 530003. 2 3. STATE BANK OF INDIA, REP. BY REGIONAL MANAGER, REGIONAL OFFICE, AMARAVATHI CIRCLE, KAKINADA. 4. STATE BANK OF INDIA, REP. BY BRANCH MANAGER, EAST GODAVARI ADB BRANCH CINAMA VEEDHI, TUNI. 5. SRI NERELLA APPARAO NANAJI, S/O LATE NERELLA SRIRAMULU, HINDU, AGED 58 YEARS, R/O DOOR NO. 3-2-1/1, CINEMA ROAD, TUNI-533401, E.G. DIST. ...RESPONDENT(S): Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to Pleased to issue writ or order more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus declaring the action of respondents 1 to 4 in payment of rent to the 5TH respondent for an amount of Rs. 60,000/- per month from the year 2017 till today and further execution of the lease agreement with 5TH respondent for the purpose of establishment of ATM was illegal and contrary to law. without considering the objections of the petitioners without giving any notice as illegal, improper, injustice, arbitrary and contrary to the law and to pass IA NO: 1 OF 2025 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the Respondents No.1 to 4 to deposit the rent of Rs.60,000/-per month from the year 2017 till today which comes to total amount of Rs.50,40,000/- for seven years before the Hon’ble Court in respect of the lease amount entitled by the petitioner pending disposal of the above writ petition and pass Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. MOTUPALLI VITTAL RAO Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. The Court made the following: 3 ::ORDER:: Heard Sri Motupalli Vittal Rao, learned counsel for the petitioners. 2. The above writ petition is filed to declare the action of respondents 1 to 4 in paying rent to the 5th respondent an amount of Rs.60,000/- per month from 2017 till date and further execution of the lease agreement for the purpose of establishment of ATM, as illegal and arbitrary. 3. The petitioners, wife, son and daughter of late Nerrella Appala Swamy filed the above writ petition. Late Nerella Appala Swamy and 5th respondent are natural brothers and sons of late Nerella Sriramulu. During the life time of late Nerella Sriramulu, a lease agreement was entered into with State Bank of India on 18.02.2016 and the same was registered vide Doc.No.1113/2016. The said Nerella Sriramulu died on 08.12.2016 as per the death certificate (Ex.P2). The Nerella Appala Swamy died on 01.04.2018. 4. The petitioners filed O.S.No.35 of 2022 on the file of the XII Additional District and Session Judge, Visakhapatnam for partition of the plaint scheduled properties against 5th respondent and others. The lessee is also arrayed as one of the defendants in the suit. The said suit is pending for adjudication. 5. After the death of late Nerella Appala Swamy, the 5th respondent entered into another lease, vide lease deed dated 28.01.2020 with the State Bank of India for erection of ATM in the part of the property, which was leased under agreement dated 18.02.2016 (Ex.P1). 6. The petitioners initially issued notice dated 18.08.2021 (Ex.P9) and thereafter filed suit for partition. Petitioners got issued another notice dated 23.10.2024 (Ex.P6). In the notice dated 23.10.2024 (Ex.P6), it was pleaded regarding competency of the lessee entered into lease date without getting consent from other co-owners. 4 7. At the hearing, learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the 5th respondent created a Will, un-registered. Acting upon the said Will, the 5th respondent entered into lease agreement with State Bank of India (Ex.P8) and has been collecting the rents. 8. Thus, as seen from the pleadings and documents, there is no dispute regarding the lease deed entered by late Nerella Sriramulu, during his life with State Bank of India (Ex.P1) and another lease dated 28.01.2020 between the 5th respondent and State Bank of India (Ex.P8). There is also an undisputed fact that the petitioners filed suit in O.S.No.35 of 2022 seeking partition and the same is pending for consideration before the competent Civil Court. The petitioners, can as well make necessary application before the trial Court requesting the Court to direct the State Bank of India to credit the amount pending disposal of the suit. Without availing appropriate remedy, the petitioners filed the above writ petition. 9. At this juncture, learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the petitioners filed I.A.No.164 of 2021, in the suit to direct the lessee-bank to deposit the rents into the Court pending the suit. The petitioners having filed interlocutory application, filing the above writ petition, in the considered opinion of this court, they are prosecuting two proceedings parallelly and such a course is impermissible. 10. Learned counsel for the petitioners confined his arguments and urged this Court to direct the learned trial Judge to dispose of I.A.No.164 of 2021. 11. Thus, as seen from the facts narrated supra, the petitioners having filed O.S.No.35 of 2022 for partition and having filed an application I.A.No.164 of 2021 for deposit of rents pending the suit, filed the above writ petition to declare the action of respondents 1 to 4 in payment of rent to the 5th respondent as illegal and arbitrary, prima-facie, the writ petition is not maintainable. The petitioners cannot prosecute parallel proceedings. 5 12. Given the facts and circumstances coupled with the request made by the learned counsel, without touching the merits of the matter, the Writ Petition is disposed of, at the stage of admission with the consent of both the learned counsel, directing the learned trial Court to dispose of the I.A.No.164 of 2021 in O.S.No.35 of 2022 filed by the petitioners as expeditiously as possible strictly as per the procedure. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. ___________________________ JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI Date: 06.03.2025 SNI 6 232 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI WRIT PETITION NO: 5723 of 2025 Date: 06.03.2025 SNI