APHC010085872017 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3459] WEDNESDAY,THE FIFTEENTH DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE SUMATHI JAGADAM WRIT PETITION NO: 6820/2017 Between: 1. VEGESHNA S V SUBBARAJU,, S/O. VENKATA RAMA RAJU, HINDU, AGED 40 YEARS, OCC: CULTIVATION, RIO. F.NO.301, TELECOM NAGAR, GACHIBOWLI, HYDERABAD ...PETITIONER AND 1. IDBI BANK LIMITED REGIONAL OFFICE, REP.BY ITS GM & REGIONAL HEAD, RETAIL BANKING GGROUP(AP II), FIRST FLOOR, PYDAH CHAMBERS, V.LP.ROAD, SIRIPURAM, VISAKHAPATNAM 530 003, 2. IDBI BANK LIMITED BHIMAVARAM BRANCH, REP.BY ITS BRANCH MANAGER/AUTHORISED OFFICER, DOOR NO.22-11-9,BESIDE LONDON HOSPITAL, SUNDAY MARKET, BHIMAVARAM, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT, A.P., PIN CODE 534201 ...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 toto issue a writ or order or direction more fully in the nature of writ of mandamus declaring the action of the respondents bank in not considering the payments deposited by the petitioner M savings bank accounts which was linked with the Loan account as per the OTS sanctioned Letter dated 17-02- 2016 of the respondent bank is illegal, arbitrary, contrary to law and violative of Article 19 of the Constitution of India besides being opposed the Principles 2 of Natural Justice and consequently direct the respondents to consider the OTS Sanctioned letter dated 17-02-2016 IA NO: 1 OF 2017(WPMP 8360 OF 2017 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 to consider the OTS Sanctioned letter dated 17-02- 2016 of the respondent bank pending the above Writ Petition Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. JAMI MADHAVI Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. The Court made the following: 3 ORDER: Sri B. Anil Kumar, learned counsel, representing Smt. Jami Madhavi, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the cause in the Writ Petition does not survive for adjudication. Recording the submission of learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, the Writ Petition is dismissed as infructuous. No order as to costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed. __________________________ JUSTICE SUMATHI JAGADAM Date: 15.10.2025 SCH 4 225 THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE SUMATHI JAGADAM WRIT PETITION NO: 6820/2017 Date: 15.10.2025 SCH