APHC010316812025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) j: MONDAY,THE THIRTIETH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO: 15816 OF 2025 Between: B Anthony, S/o. B. late Sundar, Aged about 55 yrs 296, Housing Board, VTC, Ananthapur Town, Ananthapur District. ...Petitioner R/o. D. No. 28-6- AND 1. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Represented by its Principal Secretary, Revenue Department, A.P. Secretarial, Velagapudi, Amaravati, Guntur District. 2. The District Registrar, Ananthapur District. 3. The Joint Sub Registrar, Ananthapur, Ananthapur district. 4. The Station House Officer, II town Police Station, Ananthapur District. 5. Pamulpati Lakshmi Narayana, S/o. Late P. Choudappa Aged about 65yrs, R/o. D. No. 28-6-546, AP Housing Board Colony, Ananthapur Town and Dist. 6. B Sridevi, W/o. B. Anthony, Aged about 55 yrs, 28-6-296, Housing Board, VTC, Ananthapur Town, Ananthapur District. 7. The Branch Manager, Dena Bank, presently merged with Bank of Baroda, Ananthapur Branch, Ananthapur Town and Dist. 8. Gonuguntia Kristappa, S/o G. Chinna Pullanna, Aged about 50 years, R/o. Yadalanakapalli Village, Bukkapatnam Mandal, Ananthapuram District ...Respondents 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 issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature writ of mandamus declaring the action of the 3'^'^ respondent in registering the document vide Doc. No. 2/2025 dt. 20/01/2025 in favour of the 5th respondent in respect of the house vide D. No. 12-4-221 in Sy. No. 277/2 and 276/2B, Ward old No. 4, new No. 8, present No. 12, LP. No. 77/66 in plot No. 20 situated at Adarsh Nagar, near Vidyut Nagar and Obuldev Nagar, Ananthapur Town and Districts illegal, arbitrary, violation of principles of natural justice, violation of Art. 14, 21 and 300A of Constitution of India and contrary to the provisions of Stamps and consequently set aside that same. Registration Act, 1908and lA 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 may be pleased to suspend the impugned registered document vide Doc. No. 2/2025 dt. 20/01/2025 registered by the 3rd the respondent in favour of the 5th respondent in respect of the house vide D. No. 12-4-221 in Sy. No. 277/2 and 276/2B, Ward old No. 4, new No. 8, present No. 12, LP. No. 77/66 in plot No. 20 situated at Adarsh Nagar, near Vidyut Nagar and Obuldev Nagar, Ananthapur Town and District, during the pendency of the main writ petition. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI P NARASIMHULU Counsel for the Respondent Nos. 1 to 4: GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following order: APHC010316812025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3329] MONDAY,THE THIRTIETH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO: 15816/2025 Between: 1.B ANTHONY, S/0. B. LATE SUNDAR, AGED ABOUT 55 YRS, R/0. D. NO. 28-6-296, HOUSING BOARD, VTC, ANANTHAPUR TOWN, ANANTHAPUR DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1.THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, REVENUE DEPARTMENT, A.P. SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2.THE DISTRICT REGISTRAR,ANANTHAPURDISTRICT. 3.THE JOINT SUB REGISTRAR, ANANTHAPUR, ANANTHAPUR DISTRICT. 4.THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, II TOWN POLICE STATION ANANTHAPUR DISTRICT. 5.PAMULPATI LAKSHMI NARAYANA, S/0. LATE P. CHOUDAPPA AGED ABOUT 65YRS, R/0. D. NO. 28-6-546, AP HOUSING BOARD COLONY, ANANTHAPUR TOWN AND DIST. 2 m 6.B SRIDEVI, W/0. B. ANTHONY, AGED ABOUT 55 YRS, 28-6-296, HOUSING BOARD, VTC, ANANTHAPUR TOWN, ANANTHAPUR DISTRICT. 7.THE BRANCH MANAGER, DENA BANK, PRESENTLY MERGED WITH BANK OF BARODA, ANANTHAPUR BRANCH, ANANTHAPUR TOWN AND DIST. 8.GONUGUNTLA KRISTAPPA, S/O G. CHINNA PULLANNA, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, R/0. YADALANAKAPALLI VILLAGE, BUKKAPATNAM MANDAL, ANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT ...RESPONDENT(S): Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstancesstated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased tomay be pleased to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the naturewrit of mandamus declaring the action of the Srdrespondent in registering the document vide Doc. No. 2/2025 dt. 20/01/2025 in favour of the 5th respondent in respect of the house vide D. No. 12-4-221 in Sy. No. 277/2 and 276/2B, Ward old No. 4, new No. 8, present No. 12, LP. No. 77/66 in plot No. 20 situated at Adarsh Nagar, near Vidyut Nagar aind Obuldev Nagar,Ananthapur Town and Districtis illegal, arbitrary, violation of principles of natural justice, violation of Art. 14, 21 and 300A of Constitution of India and contrary to the provisions of Stamps and Registration Act, 1908and consequently set aside that same and pass such lA 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 may be pleased to suspend the impugned registered documentvide Doc. No. 2/2025 dt. 20/01/2025 registered by the 3rd the respondent in favour of the 5th respondent in respect of the house vide D. No. 12-4-221 in Sy. No. 277/2 and 276/2B, Ward old No. 4, new No. 8, present No. 12, LP. No. 77/66 in plot No. 20 situated at Adarsh Nagar, near Vidyut Nagar and Obuldev Nagar,Ananthapur Town and District, during the pendency of the main writ petition and pass such 3 Counsel for the Petitioner: 1.P NARASIMHULU Counsel for the Respondent(S); 1.GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following: 4 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO: 15816/2025 ORDER: This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following relief: " may be pleased to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of mandamus declaring the action of the 3"^ respondent in registering the document vide Doc. No. 2/2025 dt. 20/01/2025 in favour of the 5”' respondent in respect of the house vide D. No. 12-4-221 in Sy. No. 277/2 and 276/2B, Ward old No. 4, new No. 8, present No. 12, LP. No. 77/66 in plot No. 20 situated at Adarsh Nagar, near Vidyut Nagar and Obuldev Nagar, Ananthapur Town and District is illegal, arbitrary, violation of principles of natural justice, violation of Art. 14, 21 and 300A of Constitution of India and contrary to the provisions of Stamps and Registration Act, 1908 and consequently set aside that same and pass such ” 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Assistant Government Pleader appearing for the respondents. The case of the petitioner is that the petitioner and the respondent, being husband and wife, were in peaceful possession and enjoyment of a 3. house property at Adarsh Nagar, Anantapur, which the petitioner had purchased in his wife's name vide a registered sale deed in the year 2010. The property was duly mutated in her name, with electricity and property taxes th paid regularly. In 2016, the petitioner and his wife jointly approached the 7 5 respondent for a loan of an amount of Rs.6,00,000/- offering the said property as security. The loan was sanctioned after the property was mortgaged, and the petitioner began making monthly installments of Rs.10,000/- without default. During the COVID-19 pandemic, a moratorium was availed as per government guidelines, and after the moratorium, regular payments were resumed. As of now, only Rs.3,00,000/- remains as outstanding due on that loan. 4. It is further submitted that, while the petitioner was faithfully repaying the mortgage loan, the respondent filed a separate money recovery suit against the 6^^ respondent, claiming Rs. 16,00,000/- based on a promissory note allegedly to be executed by the 6^'^ respondent. The District Court passed the judgment and decree in favor of the 8**^ respondent, who then filed an execution petition seeking sale of the very same mortgaged property. Despite the mortgage and ongoing repayments, and without verifying the encumbrance details or proper procedure, the Execution Court auctioned the property and sold it to the 5*^ respondent, declaring him as the highest bidder. The 3^*^ respondent, instead of rejecting the registration of sale deed due to the existing mortgage, colluded with the respondent Nos.5 and 8 and registered the sale in January, 2025. Thus, the property which was legally mortgaged and actively installments were being repaid was wrongfully sold and registered in the name of the 5*'^ respondent. Hence, the Writ Petition. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is claiming as the guarantor to the loan obtained by the 6*^ respondent, who is none other than the wife of the petitioner. 6. It is further submitted that pursuant to the civil proceedings in respect of the suit schedule property, the 8*^ respondent, who is the plaintiff in the suit has recovered all the money against the 6^'' respondent herein, who is the wife of the petitioner herein and the defendant in the suit who was suffered judgment and decree. As canvassed by the petitioner that the court below executed a sale deed in execution proceedings in favor of the 5*^ respondent , herein. Challenging the action of the court below in execution of the sale deed in favour of the 5*'^ respondent on the ground that the petitioner informed by the mortgager/the 7 unsustainable. I was not respondent bank is untenable and 7. The property holder i.e., the 6*^ respondent herein mortgaged the property as the defendant in the suit. Therefore, in execution proceedings, the 6 respondent has been served the required notices for passing judgment and decree as well as the execution proceedings. Therefore, challenging the 7 execution of sale deed in E.P. execution proceedings in favour of the 5*'^ respondent by way of this Writ Petition by the petitioner, being a defendant in the suit claiming as the guarantor to the loan availed by the 6‘^ respondent from the 7*^ respondent on the ground that the 3'^'^ respondent not informed about the sale deed to him and filing of this Writ Petition is nothing but an abuse of due process of law. 8. In the result, this writ petition is dismissed with costs of Rs.5,000/- (Rupees Five Thousand only) to be payable to the Secretary, Legal Services Committee, High Court of Andhra Pradesh. Consequently, Miscellaneous Petitions, if any, pending in the Writ Petition shall stand closed. MEMO OF COSTS ^ WP No. 15816 OF 2025 Cost Quantified By Court (That the writ petitioner is directed to pay costs of Rs.5,000/-( Five Thousand Rupees only) to be payable to the Secretary,Legal Services Committee, High Court of Andhra Pradesh, Amaravathi. Sd/- K TATA RAO DEPUTY REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To, 1. B Anthony, S/o. B. late Sundar, Aged about 55 yrs, R/o. D. No. 28-6- 296, Housing Board, VTC, Ananthapur Town, Ananthapur District. The Secretary, Legal Services Committee, High Court of Andhra Pradesh. One CC to SRI. P NARASIMHULU Advocate [OPUC] Two CCs to GP FOR REVENUE High Court of Andhra Pradesh [OUTl Two CD Copies 2. 3. 4. 5. HIGH COURT DATED:30/06/2025 ORDER WP NO. 15816 OF 2025 DISMISSING THE WP WITH COSTS