APHC010065462025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3331] THURSDAY, THE THIRTEENTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI WRIT PETITION NO: 3437/2025 Between: 1. K SURESH, S/O. LATE ROSHAPPA, AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS, BUSINESS RESIDING AT DINNEMEDAPALLI VILLAGE, H/O. GOWKANAPALLE, N.P.KUNTA MANDAL, SRI SATHYA SAI DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE RESERVE BANK OF INDIA, , REP.BY ITS SECRETARY, SOUTH AREA LOCAL BOARD, O/O REGIONAL DIRECTOR, FORT GLACIS, 16 RAJAJI SALAI, CHENNAI-600001. 2. THE BRANCH MANAGER, STATE BANK OF INDIA, KADIRI BRANCH, NEAR R.T.C BUS STAND. BYPASS ROAD KADIRI TOWN, SRI SATHYA SAI DISTRICT ...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 to may be pleased to issue a writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the respondent No.2 seized the petitioners bus bearing No. AP39UL1310 with key of the bus on 21-12-2024 without following the procedure and law is illegal, arbitrary, and against law and in violation of Art. 14 and 300-A of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents hand over the bus to the petitioner and pass such IA NO: 1 OF 2025 2 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 pleased to direct the respondents to release the bus bearing No. AP 39 UL 1310 and hand over the key to the petitioner, by considering the legal notice dt:01-02-2025, pending disposal of the writ petition, and pass such Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. INENI VENKATA PRASAD Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. KOTA RAMA RAO 2. VENKATA RAMA RAO KOTA The Court made the following: ::ORDER:: Heard Sri Ineni Venkata Prasad, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri K.Rama Rao, learned Standing counsel appearing for respondents. 2. The above writ petition is filed to declare the action of the 2nd respondent in seizing the petitioner’s bus bearing No.AP 39 UL 1310 on 21.12.2024, without following the prescribed procedure, as illegal and arbitrary. 3. As seen from the pleadings, the petitioner obtained a loan of Rs.45,64,000/- under STANDUP INDIA Scheme from the 2nd respondent bank and purchased a bus bearing No.AP 39 UL 1310. The vehicle was hypothecated to the bank. The Petitioner is required to repay the loan in 84 equal monthly instalments of Rs.91,205/- per month. The petitioner, however, failed to pay certain instalments. The authorities of the 2nd respondent took taken key from the petitioner on 21.12.2024 and seized the vehicle. Hence, the above writ petition is filed. 4. A counter-affidavit was filed on behalf of the 2nd respondent, wherein, it was specifically denied that the vehicle was seized by the 2nd respondent. As 3 of 29.01.2025, the amount payable by the petitioner was Rs.24,86,916/-. However, the petitioner paid a net amount of Rs.15,81,339.58/-. In para-8 of the counter-affidavit, it was specifically stated that the bank would follow the procedure scrupulously. 5. No rejoinder was filed by the petitioner rebutting the averments made in the counter affidavit. 6. Thus, as seen from the pleadings, the contention of the petitioner, regarding seizure of vehicle on 21.12.2024, is misconceived and without any proof. The specific averment in the counter-affidavit is that the vehicle was seized is recorded. This Court does not find any merit in the writ petition and the writ petition is liable to be dismissed. 7. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. ___________________________ JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI Dated: 13.03.2025 SNI 4 114 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI WRIT PETITION No.3437 OF 2025 Dated: 13.03.2025 SNI