y APHC010333402025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) SMS THURSDAY,THE THIRD DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE DHIRAJ SINGH THAKUR, THE CHIEF JUSTICE AND HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R RAGHUNANDAN RAO WRIT PETITION NO: 16584 OF 2025 Between: 1. Dr. Veera Raghavulu Mutyala, S/o. Satyanarayana Murthy, 17-2-3, Pallapu Street Palakollu, West Godavari District, Pradesh - 534260. 2. Mutyala Naga Veera Venkata Satya Leela Kumari, W/o. Dr. Veera Raghavulu Mutyala, aged about 65 years, R/o. D.No. 17-2-3, Street Palakollu, West Godavari District, Andhra Pradesh - 534260 R/o. D.No. Andhra Pallapu ...Petitioners AND 1. The Union of India, Rep by its Secretary Department of Financial Services, Ministry of Finance, 3rd Floor, JeevanDeep Building, Sansad Marg, New Delhi-110001. 2. The Reserve Bank of India, 6 Sansad Marg, New Delhi-110001, Rep by its General Manager 3. The ICICI Bank limited. Rep. by its Chief Manager, Registered office Hyderabad District, ICICI Bank, Gach'ibowli Financial District. at 4. The ICICI Bank Limited, Rep. by its Authorised Signatoiy, Reistered office at D.N. 43-1-1 Andhra Pradesh - 534 260. Manmoharr Mansion, MG Road, Palakollu, 5. Nunavath Yugandar, S/o Veeranna, aged about 32 years, Business, R/o D.No. 12-7, Bsavarajupalli Tanda, Edula Chervu Village, Thirumalaya Palem Mandal, Khammam District. 6. Chikkam Vamsi Krishna, S/o. Not Known, R/o. D.no. 9-68/9, 2nd Line, East s Hanuman Nagar, Boduppal, Ghatkasar, Hyderabad. Presently residing at D.No. 17/2/3, Sai Bhargavi Eye Hospital, 0pp. Bsnl Office, Palakolu Maniciplaity, Palakolu. 7. Sree Chikkam Bharathi, W/o. Chikkam Vamsi Krishna, S/o. Not Known, R/o. D.no. 9-68/9, Occ 2nd Line, East Hanuman Nagar, Boduppal, Ghatkasar, Hyderabad. Presently residing at D.No. 17/2/3, Sai Bhargavi Eye Hospital, 0pp. Bsnl Office, Palakolu Maniciplaity, Palakolu ...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 appropriate writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of Respondent No.4 in issuing a notice under Section 14 of SARFAESI Act dated 19.04.2025 and claiming to take possession of the subject property, despite the fact that the Petitioner is the absolute owner of the subject property and he is neither a borrower nor guarantor as being illegal, arbitrary, violative of the principles of natural justice, and in breach of Articles 14, 21, and 300-A of the Constitution of India and Consequently set aside the notice issued under Section 14 of SARFAESI Act dated 19.04.2025 by Respondent No.4. 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 to grant Stay of all further proceedings pursuant to the Notice, Dt. 19.04.2025, issued by the Respondent No.4. Counsel for the Petitioners: SRI GULIPALI SURAJ Counsel for the Respondent Nos. 1 and 2: ADDITIONAL SOLICITOR GENERAL OF INDIA The Court made the following order: Of APHC010333402025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI Bench Sr.No:- LM-1 [3446] SMS WRIT PETITION NO: 16584 of 2025 Dr. Veera Raghavulu Mutyala and another ...Petitioners Vs. The Union of India and others ...Respondents ********** Advocate for Petitioners Mr. Gulipali Suraj Advocate for Respondents CORAM :THE CHIEF JUSTICE DHIRAJ SINGH THAKUR SRI JUSTICER RAGHUNANDANRAO DATE : 3rd July 2025 PC : The present petition is filed challenging the proceedings under the SARFAESI Act, 2002, initiated by respondent Nos.3 & 4 with regard to the property which the petitioner claims belong to him. 2. It is not denied that there was a General Power of Attorney executed by the petitioner in favour of respondent No.5 to alienate the property in question to third properties, who obtained loans and defaulted subsequently leading to the initiation of proceedings under the SARFAESI Act, 2002, against them. 3. The case set up by the petitioner before us is that SARFAESI proceedings cannot be permitted to continue inasmuch as fraud was played 2 HCJ & RRRJ W.P.No. 16584 of 2025 upon the petitioner by his General Power of Attorney holder, who had represented the General Power of Attorney as an Agreement to Sell. 4. We see that at least the petitioner No.1 is a doctor and therefore the assertion that the petitioner believed the document to be one not as that of a GPA but an Agreement to Sell does not satisfy us. 5. in any case, the issues of fraud etc. involving the disputed questions of fact cannot be gone into the present writ proceedings. The petitioner also appears to have filed a civil suit which is still pending in regard to the sale conducted by respondent No.5 in favour of respondent Nos.6 & 7. 6. Be that as it may, the petitioner having already proceeded to avail the alternate remedies, we do not think it is a fit case to invoke extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. This petition is found to be without any merit and is, accordingly, dismissed. No costs. our Consequently, connected miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed. Sd/- N. NAGAMMA ASSISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To, 1. One CC to Sri. Gulipali Sura] Advocate [OPUC] 2. One CC to Additional Solicitor General of India [OPUC] 3. Three CD Copies GSC HIGH COURT DATED:03/07/2025 ORDER WP NO. 16584 OF 2025 ^17JUL 2025 ^s^^rrent SectjopxVy o Co DISMISSING THE WP WITHOUT COSTS