APHC010080512024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3524] WEDNESDAY,THE TWENTY FIRST DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI NATH TILHARI THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM WRIT PETITION NO: 4417/2024 Between: 1. BATCHALAPADMAJA RANI,, D/O SRI B. SATYANARAYANA AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS, OCC ASSISTANT MANAGER INDIAN OVERSEAS BANK, ABIDS BRANCH R/O FLAT NO.308, UDAYA'SBALAJI RESIDENCY JAWAHARNAGAR, HYDERABAD ...PETITIONER AND 1. STATE BANK OF INDIA, STRESSED ASSETS RECOVERY BRANCH REP. BY ITS CHIEF MANAGER ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE CAMPUS, BALAJINAGAR SIRIPURAM JUNCTION, VISAKHAPATNAM, VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT, AP. 2. THE STATE BANK OF INDIA, KOHINOOR BRANCH, VISAKHAPATNAM REP. BY ITS CHIEF MANAGER VISAKHAPTNAM DISTRICT, A.P. 3. MR IRINJILA SHANTI SRUJAN, S/O.LATE I. VASUDEVA RAO, AGED 51 YEARS,R/O.MIG 66, D.NO.55 -23 -28,BHASKAR KAMALAM, F1B COLONY,VISAKHAPATNAM - 530022, VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT . RESPONDENT NO.3 WAS INCORPORATED AS PER C.O.DT.15.11.2024 IN W.P.NO.4417 OF 2024. ...RESPONDENT(S): Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. MOKA KONDALA RAO Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. S SATYANARAYANA MOORTHY 2. SHAIK ABDUL KALAM RIYAZ The Court made the following: 2 ORDER: (per Hon’ble Sri Justice Ravi Nath Tilhari) Heard Sri S.A.Razak, learned counsel for the petitioner, appearing through virtual mode, Sri S.Satyanarayana Moorthy, learned Standing Counsel for the State Bank of India/respondents 1 and 2 and Sri Shaik Riyaz, learned counsel appearing through virtual mode for the 3rd respondent. 2. This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed by the petitioner (wife of the 3rd respondent herein) for the prayer in the nature of writ of Mandamus to direct the respondent- Bank to release the documents pertaining to Flat No.714, 6th floor, ‘Gadiraju Empire’, Visakhapatnam, M.V.P.Colony, to the petitioner inasmuch as the entire outstanding amount of Rs.73,61,606/- of loan account No.35913650001 has been paid as per the directions of this Court in W.P.No.30757 of 2023 vide judgment dated 23.01.2024. 3. The loan was taken from the Bank by the petitioner and the 3rd respondent (wife and husband respectively). The title deed i.e. sale deed was deposited with the Bank. The said sale deed is also in the name of both, the petitioner and the 3rd respondent. When the loan could not be repaid, and the proceedings were initiated by the Bank for auction, W.P.No.30757 of 2023 was filed by the present 3 petitioner(the wife), which was disposed of finally vide judgment dated 23.01.2024, with the following directions. “6. Since the petitioner has already deposited 25% of the outstanding amount, as per the orders of this Court in W.P.Nos.27095 and 13279 of 2021, and in view of the request made by the learned counsel for the petitioner to grant time for payment of the due amount, in order to meet ends of justice, this Court deems it appropriate to dispose of the present writ petition in the following manner: 1) The petitioner shall pay 50% of the outstanding amount within a period of one month from today i.e., on or before 21.02.2024. 2) 25% of the due amount shall be paid within one month thereafter i.e., on or before 25.03.2024. 3) The balance due amount plus interest shall be paid within one month thereafter i.e., on or before 23.04.2024. 4) It is made clear that the proposed auction may go on, but the same shall not be finalised. 5) It is also made clear that in case the petitioner fails to make payment of anyone of the instalments, it is open for the 1st respondent-bank authorities to proceed further, as per law. There shall be no order as to costs.” 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has complied with those directions and has paid the entire amount in terms thereof. He submits that the petitioner, thereafter applied for return of the title deed to the Bank. The Bank issued the reply stating that since the loan was taken by both and since the document is in the names of both persons, the document could not be returned only to the petitioner. 4 5. During pendency of the writ petition, the 3rd respondent has filed O.S.No.85 of 2025 in the Court of the I Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division) at Visakhapatnam, for partition as also for injunction to restrain the 2nd defendant in the said suit, the State Bank of India, not to release the original documents to the 1st defendant in the absence of the plaintiff. 6. The 1st defendant in the suit is the wife, writ petitioner herein and the plaintiff is the husband, the 3rd respondent herein. 7. In the said suit, I.A.No.324 of 2025 was filed for grant of temporary injunction, in which the learned Trial Court has passed an ex parte ad-interim injunction directing the 2nd respondent-Bank, not to release the original registered sale deed vide Document No.7292/2016 and other linked documents relating to the plaint schedule property till 21.04.2025. It is submitted by the learned counsel for both the parties that the said interim order has been extended and I.A. is pending and the present petitioner (1st defendant in the suit) has applied for vacation of the interim order along with the counter-affidavit. I.A.No.324 of 2025 in the suit is pending for disposal. 8. Learned counsel for the petitioner raised the argument that the civil court has no jurisdiction and that after filing of the writ 5 petition, the suit could not have been filed, which is not maintainable. 9. So far as the aforesaid contentions are concerned, if the suit is not maintainable or Court has the jurisdiction or not, cannot be gone into in the present writ petition, which is for an entirely different relief. In the present writ petition, there is no challenge to any of the proceedings of the suit. 10. Consequently, in view of the subsequent development, which has taken place i.e. the civil suit and the ad-interim injunction granted therein, we are not inclined to entertain the writ petition which is dismissed, on the aforesaid ground only. 11. The Writ Petition is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, interlocutory applications pending if any, shall stand closed. _____________________ RAVI NATH TILHARI, J ______________________________ MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM, J Date: 21.01.2026 Pab