APHC010058372026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3558] THURSDAY,THE FIFTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE CHEEKATI MANAVENDRANATH ROY THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TUHIN KUMAR GEDELA WRIT PETITION NO: 3347/2026 Between: 1. GUNNAMREDDY BHUDEVI, W/O LATE SRI CHENCHU DAYAKAR REDDY AGED ABOUT 85 YEARS, R/O H.NO.8-29-2/1, PLOT NO. 18, SBI COOPERATIVE HOUSING SOCIETY LTD., ROAD NO.2, VENTURE-2, RAJAHMUNDRY, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT. 2. 2. GADDAM ARUNA REDDY,, W/O SRI G. NAGESHWAR REDDY, AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS, R/O H.NO.8-29-2/1, PLOT NO. 18, SBI COOPERATIVE HOUSING SOCIETY LTD., ROAD NO.2, VENTURE- 2, RAJAHMUNDRY, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT. 3 3. . Y. SAILAJA REDDY,, D/O LATE SRI CHENCHU DAYAKAR REDDY, AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS, R/O H.NO.8-29-2/1, PLOT NO. 18, SBI COOPERATIVE HOUSING SOCIETY LTD., ROAD NO.2, VENTURE- 2, RAJAHMUNDRY, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER(S) AND 1. THE AUTHORISED OFFICER, UCO BANK, ASSET MANAGEMENT BRANCH, D.NO.6-3-1108, GROUND FLOOR, NAVABHARAT CHAMBERS, RAJ BHAVAN ROAD, HYDERABAD. 2. 2. UCO BANK MID CORPORATE BRANCH, REP., BY ITS BRANCH MANAGER, D.NO.82-418, KRISHNA HOUSE, ROAD NO.4 7, BANJARA HILLS, HYDERABAD. 3. G B R CONSTRUCTIONS PVT, LTD., REP., BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR, PLOT NO.226, BLOCK III, ROAD NO.78, JUBILEE HILLS COOPERATIVE HOUSING SOCIETY, JUBILEE HILLS, HYDERABAD - 500033. 4. 4. GUNNAMREDDY MADHUSUDHAN REDDY, S/O LATE SRI CHENCHU DAYAKAR REDDY, MAJOR, FLAT NO.N-101,1ST FLOOR, AKSHAY NAGRAJ APARTMENT SUNCITY LAYOUT, 4TH CROSS, KODHATHI VILLAGE ROAD, KODHATHI, BENGALURU- 560035. 2 CMR,J & GTK,J W.P.No.3347 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 topleased to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction more particularlyone in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the impugned order passed by the Honble Debts Recovery Tribunal-I at Hyderabad in lA No. 300 of 2026 in SA No. 45 of 2026, dated 30.01.2026 directing the petitioners to deposit an amount of Rs.4,70,00,000/- in three instalments, the first instalment to be paid within one week from the date of order is absolutely arbitrary, illegal, null and void and against the norms of public policy and principles of natural justice and double jeopardy and violative of orders passed in SA No. 222 of 2017, dated 3.8.2020 and the orders passed in WP No. 20024 of 2020 and the provisions of SARFAESI Act and to set aside the same and to 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 pleased to grant stay of all further proceedings in pursuance of the order passed by the Honble Debts Recovery Tribunal-ll at Hyderabad in lA No. 300 of 2026 in SA No. 45 of 2026, dated 30.01.2026, pending disposal of the above writ petition and to pass Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. VENKAT SAILENDRA G Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. The Court made the following: 3 CMR,J & GTK,J W.P.No.3347 of 2026 ORDER: (Per Hon’ble Sri Justice Cheekati Manavendranath Roy) Heard learned counsel for the petitioners. 2. Challenging the impugned order dated 30.01.2026 passed in I.A.No.300 of 2026 in S.A.No.45 of 2026 on the file of the Debts Recovery Tribunal-II, Hyderabad, whereby the Tribunal has ordered to deposit a sum of Rs.4,70,00,000/- in three installments being the reserve price, the present writ petition has been filed. 3. Since this writ petition is being disposed of on the ground of its maintainability, notice to respondents is dispensed with. 4. The petitioners are the guarantors for the loan availed by the principal borrower from the respondent-bank. As the principal borrower committed default in repayment of the loan amount, the respondent-bank has initiated measures under the SARFAESI Act and brought the secured asset for sale in public auction. The same is questioned before the Debts Recovery Tribunal, Visakhaptnam, by way of filing a Securitization Application. Again, when the bank proposed to sell the same property in Hyderabad, the petitioners have filed S.A.No.45 of 2026 on the file of the Debts Recovery Tribunal-II, Hyderabad. In the said application in I.A.No.300 of 2026, the Tribunal has directed the petitioners to deposit a sum of Rs.4,70,00,000/- in three installments towards the reserve price. Aggrieved by the said order, the present writ petition is preferred. 5. Section 18 of the Act provides a statutory right of appeal to an aggrieved person even against an interim order passed by the Tribunal. Therefore, the petitioners have to avail the statutory remedy of appeal provided under the Act. Without exhausting the said remedy, they cannot maintain the present writ petition. Therefore, we are not inclined to entertain the writ petition. 4 CMR,J & GTK,J W.P.No.3347 of 2026 6. Resultantly, the Writ Petition is disposed of with a direction to the petitioner to avail the statutory remedy of appeal provided under Section 18 of the Act. However, as the Tribunal has directed to pay huge sum of Rs.4,70,00,000/- towards the reserve price in the first week of February which is coming to end within two days for payment of the first installment, there shall be interim stay of the impugned order till the petitioners prefer an appeal before the appellate authority and obtain interim order there. Three weeks time is given to the petitioners to prefer an appeal against the impugned order. There shall be no order as to costs. 7. As a sequel, Miscellaneous Applications pending, if any, shall stand closed. ________________________________________ CHEEKATI MANAVENDRANATH ROY, J _______________________ TUHIN KUMAR GEDELA, J Date : 05-02-2026 Note: Issue CC by 09.02.2026 B/o BMS