IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI WEDNESDAY, THE FIFTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI CONTEMPT CASE NO: 181 OF 2013 IN WRIT PETITION NO. 30008 OF 2010 Petition under Sections 10 to 12 of Contempt of Courts Act 1971 praying that in the circumstances;;?tated in the affidavit file herein the High Court may be pleased to punish the Contemners herein for willfully disobeying the orders of this .tip^n'^le High Court passed by His Lordship Justice L.Narasimha Reddy in W.P.No.30008/2010, dated 23.3.2011 in such manner and in such a way as this Hon'ble Court deems fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. Between: M.Jayasree,, W/o. Venkateswaflu Naidu, aged about 39 H.No.6/1180, Cooperative Colony,-Kadapa. years, R/o. ...PETITIONER i ^ '>■ i AND 1. Sri Adithya, Chief Managef-Cufri-Authorized Officer, Bank of Baroda Roads, Kadapa. 2. Sri Adithya, Branch Manager, Bank of Baroda, 7 Roads, Kadapa. 7 APHC010723282013 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3331] WEDNESDAY, THE FIFTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI CONTEMPT CASE NO: 181/2013 Between: 1.M.JAYASREE,, W/0. VENKATESWARLU NAIDU, AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS. R/0. H.NO.6/1180, COOPERATIVE COLONY, KADAPA. ...PETITIONER AND 1.SRI ADITHYA, CHIEF MANAGER-CUM-AUTHORIZED OFFICER BANK OF BARODA, 7 ROADS, KADAPA. 2. SRI ADITHYA, BRANCH MANAGER, BANK OF BARODA. 7 ROADS KADAPA. ...CONTEMNOR{S): Petition under Sections 10 to 12 of Contempt of Courts Act 1971 praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit file herein the High Court may be pleased to pleased to punish the Contemners herein for willfully disobeying the orders of this Hon'ble High Court passed by His Lordship Justice L.Narasimha Reddy in W.P.No.30008/2010, dated 23.3.2011 in such manner and in such a way as this Hon'ble Court deems fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. lA NO: 1 OF 2013(APPL 106 OF 2013 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 Contemners not to handover the documents of Mortgage of Thumrr^la Hanumanth Naidu to third parties, pending disposal of the Contempt Case and pass 2 Counsel for the Petitioner: 1.P SREE RAMULU NAIDU Counsel for the Contemnor(S): 1. The Court made the following: :: ORDER :: Heard Sri N.Krishna Sai, learned counsel Ramulu Naidu, learned counsel for the petitioner. representing Sri P.Sree 2. The above contempt case is filed complaining about the implementation of the order dated 23.03.2011 in W.P.No.30008 of 2010. non- 3. The Writ Petition was filed to declare the action of the bank in not accepting the loan repayment towards the loan obtained by T.Hanumantha Naidu, S/o. Venkatappa Naidu petitioner, without there being any legal impediment, is illegal and arbitrary. 4. The writ petition was allowed on 23.01.2011. The operative portion of the order reads as follows: “Hence, the Writ Petition is disposed of leaving it open to the petitioner to approach the respondents together with his vendor for redemption of the mortgage. In case, the borrowed amount is paid in the presence of the borrower i.e., Tummala Hanumantha Rao. the respondents shall permit the redemption of mortgage.” 5. At the hearing, Sri N.Krishna Sai, learned counsel representing learned counsel for the petitioner, would submit that the whereabouts of Sri Tummala Hanumantha Rao is not known. The petitioner filed civil suit in O.S.No.46 of 2010 on the file of IV Additional District Judge, Kadapa, seeking a specific performance against Sri T.Hanumantha Naidu and the same is pending for consideration. respondents’ Sri on 22.09.2005, by the 3 Thus, as seen from the order, while disposing of the writ petition, liberty was granted to the petitioner to approach the bank along with the vendor for redemption. If the amount is paid in the presence of the borrower i.e., Sri T.Hanumantha Naidu (vendor of the petitioner), the respondents are directed to permit redemption of the mortgage. The order passed by the Court is very clear that the amount should be paid in the presence of Hanumantha Rao, the original borrower and owner of the property. Learned counsel would contend that the whereabouts of Sri Hanumantha Rao are not known. If such is the case, the complaint of the order regarding alleged violation of the order in the writ petition doesn’t arise, and in fact, it is misconceived. This Court doesn’t find any violation of the order, and hence, the contempt case is closed. No costs. 7. As a sequel, pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. Sd/- E KAMESWARA RAO JOINT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To, Sri Adithya, Chief Manager-cum-Authorized Officer, Bank of Baroda, 7 Roads, Kadapa. 1. 2. Sri Adithya, Branch Manager, Bank of Baroda, 7 Roads, Kadapa. 3. One CC to SRI P SREE RAMULU NAIDU Advocate [OPUC] Three CD Copies 4. . ^ HIGH COURT \ DATED; 05/03/2025 ORDER CC.No.181 of 2013 .1 JUN 202S Us o . -4- ■i'T •v ■>, CLOSING THE CONTEMPT CASE