IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) APHC010485222025 'O' % W .V TUESDAY, THE SIXTEENTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE / PRESENT HONOURABLE SRI DHIRAJ SINGH THAKUR, THE CHIEF JUSTICE AND tHE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI WRIT PETITION NO: 24774 OF 2025 Between: Surisetty Lakshmana Rao, S/o S. Satyanarayana (Late), Aged 46 yrs D.No.37-10-127, Managing Partner of Concrest Construction, Ayyappanagar Muralinagar, Visakhapatnam ...Petitioner AND 1. Union Bank of India, (Erstwhile Andhra Bank) Asset Recovery Branch , Represented by its Authorised Officer Cum Chief Manager, Bonagiri Veereswara Venkata Rajeev Kumar, S/o Veeravataram, Aged 43 yrs, D.No.26-15-150, Andhra Bank Building Visakhapatnam-1- 2. Smt. K Likitha M.P.No.192/2025 Visakhapatnam) Visakhapatnam. 3. The Station House Officer, V ^own Police Station, Kancharapalem Visakhapatnam. Changalraopeta Advocate Commissoiner (Appointed in CrI on the file of Chief Judicial Magistrate, ...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 or Order or Direction more particularly one in the nature of a Writ of Ceritorari to Call for the Records pertaining to the Impugned Order dt.29-07-2025 passed in CrI M.P.No. 192/2015 on the file of Chief Judicial Magistrate at Visakhapatnam U/s 14 of SARFEASI Act, on that the 2nd Respondent issued a Notice to the Petitioner along with the respondent that they are going to vacate/dispossess the Petitioner from his Residential Property i.e., house bearing D.No. 39-3-39/1 consisting of Ground , First, Second and Third Floor of Plot No. 17 S.No.50/5 Madhavadhara Visakhapatnam is nothing but Illegal, Unlawful, Violatoin of Principles of Natural Justice, Violation of Section 14 Sarfeasi Act, Violation of Article 14,19,21 and 300-A of the Constitution of India, Curtailing the rights of the Petitioner in Securitization Appeal (S.A.,) No. 383/2025 before the Debts Recovery Tribunal, Visakhapatnam as no orders were passed disposed the Stay Application I.A.,01/2025 by the Tribunal, Consequently to Quash the ^ Impugned Order dt.29-07-2025 passed in CrI M.P.No.192/2015 on the file of Chief Judicial Magistrate at Visakhapatnam by Allowing the Writ Petition lA NO: 2 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 not to take any Coervie Steps as against the Petitioner's Property covered in the Schedule in CRL MP.NO. 192/2025 on the file of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Visakhapatnam pending finalization of the Stay Application in I.A.No.01/2025 in SVVTJo.383/2025 before the Debts Recovery Tribunal, Visakhapatnam ^ Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI R LEELA SAI SAMPATH, REPRESENTING SRI R SIVA SAI SWARUP Counsel for the Respondents: M/S. V DYUMANI Counsel for the Respondent No.3: GP FOR HOME The Court made the following order: APHC010485222025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH Sr.No:-28 [3483] Q£[i] AT AMARAVATI WRIT PETITION NO: 24774 of 2025 Surisetty Lakshmana Rao ...Petitioner Vs. Union Bank of India and others ...Respondents ********** Advocate for petitioner Sri R. Leela Sai Sampath representing Sri R. Siva Sai Swarup Smt V. Dyumani Advocate for respondents CORAM :THE CHIEF JUSTICE DHIRAJ SINGH THAKUR SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI : 16th September 2025 DATE PC: The present petition has been filed primarily alleging that even when a Securitisation Application vide S.A.No.383 of 2025 has been filed and is pending before the Debts Recovery Tribunal, Visakhapatnam (D.R.T.) accompanied by an interlocutory application bearing No.2652 of 2025, the I.A. has now been fixed for consideration in the month of November. 2. The petitioner apprehends that by the time the I.A. is taken up for consideration, the physical possession of the premises in question, which is a secured asset with the bank, would be taken rendering the proceedings before the D.R.T. academic. 3. Learned counsel for the respondent Bank, on the other hand, has • shown us the order dated 20.08.2025 passed in S.A.No.383 of 2025 wherein it is stated that the counsel for the petitioner, who is the applicant before the D.R.T., had sought for time and disposal of I.A.No.2652 of 2025. It is stated that while the petitioner may project as if the D.R.T. was not considering the application considering the urgency required in the matter, yet, the petitioner himself was delaying the disposal of the I.A. and therefore, required no protection on that account. 4. We intend to agree with the learned counsel for the respondent that the extraordinary writ jurisdiction cannot be exercised in cases where the party itself is delaying the proceedings before the forum below. We, therefore, allow the petitioner, if so advised, to file an application for preponement of I.A.No.2652 of 2025. We do not deem it appropriate and necessary to give any interim protection to the petitioner at this stage. 5. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs. Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed. Sd/- K.KASI RAO ACHAR! ASSISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// J SECTIoi^FFjhFR To, 1. The Debts Recovery Tribunal, Visakhapatnam (DRT). 2. The Authorized Officer cum Chief Manager, Union Bank of India, (Erstwhile Andhra Bank) Asset Recovery Branch, Bonagiri Veereswara Venkata Rajeev Kumar, S/o Veeravataram, Aged 43 yrs, D.No.26-15- 150 Andhra Bank Building , Changalraopeta, Visakhapatnam-1- 3. The Station House Officer, V Town Police Station, Kancharapalem, Visakhapatnam. 4. One CC to SRI R SIVA SAI SWARUP Advocate [OPUC] 5. Two CCs to GP FOR HOME High Court of Andhra Pradesh [OUT] 6. One CC to M/S. V DYUMANI Advocate [OPUC] 7. Two CD Copies asa HIGH COURT DATED: 16/09/2025 ORDER WP NO. 24774 OF 2025 p 2 5 SEP 2025 A Current section ^ /o DISPOSING THE WP WITHOUT COSTS