Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Andhra Pradesh · body

2026 DAILYLAW 14238 (AP)

GUDE NAGARAJU v. PIRAMAL CAPITAL AND HOUSING FINANCE LIMITED

WP/357/2026 · 2026-01-05

Cheekati Manavendranath Roy, Tuhin Kumar Gedela

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

APHC010003422026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH TUESDAY, TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE CHEEKATI MANAVENDRANATH ROY THE HONOURABLE SRI WRIT PETITION NO: 357/2026 Between: 1. GUDE NAGARAJU, S/O GUDE CHINA PERAIAH, AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS, R/O DOOR NO.2 PRAKASAM DISTRICT 1. PIRAMAL CAPITAL AND HOUSING REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORIZED OFFICER, GUNTUR BRANCH, OFFICE AT D.NO.4 CHANDRAMOULI NAGAR, NEAR RING ROAD, GUNTUR 2. SRI Y MOUNIKA, AGED ABOUT NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER, D/O OF NOT KNOWN TO T COMMISSIONER, APPOINTED IN CRL.MP. NO.203/2025 ON THE FILE OF THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, ONGOLE 3. MR PAVULURI HARI KIRAN, S/O SRINIVASA RAO, AGED ABOUT NOT KNOWN TO THE PETIT LINE, GOPAL NAGAR ONGOLE, PRAKASAM DISTRICT 4. MRS PAVULURI RAJINI, W/O PAVULURI HARI KIRAN, AGED ABOUT NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER, R/O DOOR NO.39 1ST LINE, GOPAL NAGAR ONGOLE, PRAKASAM DISTRICT IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE SIXTH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE CHEEKATI MANAVENDRANATH ROY THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TUHIN KUMAR GEDELA WRIT PETITION NO: 357/2026 GUDE NAGARAJU, S/O GUDE CHINA PERAIAH, AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS, R/O DOOR NO.2-1-291/11, GADDALAGUNTA ONGOLE, PRAKASAM DISTRICT-523002. ...PETITIONER AND PIRAMAL CAPITAL AND HOUSING FINANCE LIMITED, REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORIZED OFFICER, GUNTUR BRANCH, OFFICE AT D.NO.4-18-29, 1ST FLOOR, P.N0.1 AND 2, CHANDRAMOULI NAGAR, NEAR RING ROAD, GUNTUR SRI Y MOUNIKA, AGED ABOUT NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER, D/O OF NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER, THE ADVOCATE COMMISSIONER, APPOINTED IN CRL.MP. NO.203/2025 ON THE FILE OF THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE-CUM- SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, ONGOLE-523001. MR PAVULURI HARI KIRAN, S/O SRINIVASA RAO, AGED ABOUT NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER, R/O DOOR NO. 39 LINE, GOPAL NAGAR ONGOLE, PRAKASAM DISTRICT MRS PAVULURI RAJINI, W/O PAVULURI HARI KIRAN, AGED ABOUT NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER, R/O DOOR NO.39 1ST LINE, GOPAL NAGAR ONGOLE, PRAKASAM DISTRICT IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH [3558] THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE CHEEKATI MANAVENDRANATH ROY JUSTICE TUHIN KUMAR GEDELA GUDE NAGARAJU, S/O GUDE CHINA PERAIAH, AGED ABOUT 37 291/11, GADDALAGUNTA ONGOLE, ...PETITIONER FINANCE LIMITED, REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORIZED OFFICER, GUNTUR 29, 1ST FLOOR, P.N0.1 AND 2, CHANDRAMOULI NAGAR, NEAR RING ROAD, GUNTUR-522007. SRI Y MOUNIKA, AGED ABOUT NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER, HE PETITIONER, THE ADVOCATE COMMISSIONER, APPOINTED IN CRL.MP. NO.203/2025 ON THE - PRINCIPAL MR PAVULURI HARI KIRAN, S/O SRINIVASA RAO, AGED ABOUT IONER, R/O DOOR NO. 39-5-21, 1ST LINE, GOPAL NAGAR ONGOLE, PRAKASAM DISTRICT-523001. MRS PAVULURI RAJINI, W/O PAVULURI HARI KIRAN, AGED ABOUT NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER, R/O DOOR NO.39-5-21, 1ST LINE, GOPAL NAGAR ONGOLE, PRAKASAM DISTRICT-523001. 2 CMR,J & GTK,J W.P.No.357 of 2026 ...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 issue any appropriate Writ, order or Direction preferably a Writ in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 1st Respondent in initiating recovery proceedings and the subsequent orders passed in CRL.MP.No.203/2025 on the file of the Chief Judicial Magistrate-cum- Principal Senior Civil Judge, Ongole, as illegal, arbitrary, and violative of the Petitioner's fundamental rights under Articles 14, 21 and 300A of the Constitution of India and consequently, stay all further proceedings including the execution of the warrant for taking physical possession of the property in Flat No. 104, 1st Floor, Door No.37-76-97-104, Assessment No. 1035065317, 1st Floor, Thirumala Residency, Ongole, Prakasam District, until the Petitioner approach the Debt Recovery Tribunal and obtain necessary interim orders and pass IA NO: 1 OF 2026 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 including taking possession, transfer, or sale of the secured property in Flat No.104, 1st Floor, Door No.37-76-97-104, Assessment No. 1035065317, 1st Floor, Thirumala Residency, Ongole, Prakasam District, and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. SHAIK AMEENA REHMANI Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. 3 CMR,J & GTK,J W.P.No.357 of 2026 The Court made the following: ORDER: (Per Hon’ble Sri Justice Cheekati Manavendranath Roy) Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. 2. Claiming to be the tenant in respect of the secured asset under the principal borrower, who is the owner of the property and claiming to be the prospective vendee under the agreement of sale said to have been executed by the owner of the property, the petitioner has filed this writ petition challenging the measures initiated by the respondent No.1-financial institution against the principal borrower and the guarantor for realization of the loan amount. The petitioner has got an efficacious remedy of approaching the Debts Recovery Tribunal, which is the appropriate forum specially constituted under the special enactment for redressal of such grievances. But, without approaching the Debts Recovery Tribunal, the petitioner has directly approached this Court by invoking writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of Constitution of India. The Supreme Court has time and again deprecated the practice of entertaining the writ petitions when the aggrieved person got an adequate remedy of approaching the Debts Recovery Tribunal for redressal of his grievance. As the petitioner has got an efficacious remedy of approaching the Tribunal for redressal of his grievance, we are not inclined to interfere in the matter and to entertain the writ petition. 3. Therefore, the Writ Petition is disposed of with a direction to the petitioner to approach the Debts Recovery Tribunal seeking redressal of his grievance. There shall be no order as to costs. 4 CMR,J & GTK,J W.P.No.357 of 2026 As a sequel, Interlocutory Applications pending, if any, shall stand closed. ________________________________________ JUSTICE CHEEKATI MANAVENDRANATH ROY _____________________________ JUSTICE TUHIN KUMAR GEDELA Date: 06.01.2026 MDP