APHC010146302026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3558] TUESDAY,THE TWENTY FOURTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE CHEEKATI MANAVENDRANATH ROY THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TUHIN KUMAR GEDELA WRIT PETITION NO: 8008/2026 Between: 1. KASA KOTESWARI, W/O. SIVA RAMA KRISHNA, D/O. LATE VUDATHA PEDDANNA, R/O. DOOR NO.7-114, SADASIVAIAH COLONY, PEDAKAKANI, GUNTUR DISTRICT, A.P - 522509. ...PETITIONER AND 1. UNION OF INDIA, REP BY ITS SECRETARY MINISTRY OF FINANCE NEW DELHI - 110001. 2. KOTAK MAHINDRA BANK, REP. BY ITS AUTHORIZED OFFICER DR.NO.6-3- 1109/1, 2ND FLOOR, NAVABHARATH CHAMBERS, RAJ BHAVAN ROAD, SOMAJIGUDA, HYDERABAD - 500 082, TELANGANA, INDIA. 3. KOTAK MAHINDRA BANK, VIJAYAWADA BRANCH, REP.BY ITS AUTHORIZED SIGNATORY, SITUATED AT DR.NO.29-4-19, KODANDARAMIREDDY STREET, REHAMAN PARK, 0PP. WATER TANK. GOVERNOR PET, VIJAYAWADA - 520 002. 4. KOTAK MAHINDRA BANK, REGISTERED OFFICE, REP.BY ITS AUTHORIZED SIGNATORY SITUATED AT NO.27, BKC, C 27, G BLOCK, BANDRA COMPLEX, BANDRA (EAST), MUMBAI - 400 051. 5. VUDATHA MALLESWARI, W/O. LATE PEDDANNA, AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS, R/O. FLAT NO. 104, SRI ANJANEYAM APARTMENT, STAMBALAGARUVU NEAR RAMALAYAM, GUNTUR - 522006 6. VUDATHA TRIVENI, D/O. LATE PEDDANNA, W/O. VUTLA BALAJI, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, R/O. FLAT NO.302, ROAD NO.7, KRUSHI NAGAR, MADINAGUDA, MIYAPUR, HYDERABAD - 500049. 2 CMR,J & GTK,J W.P.No.8008 of 2026 7. VUDATHA VENU GOPAL, S/O. LATE PEDDANNA, R/O. FLAT NO.104, SRI ANJANEYAM APARTMENT, STAMBALAGARUVU, NEAR RAMALAYAM, GUNTUR - 522006 8. VUDATHA VANI, D/O. LATE PEDDANNA, W/O. VISHNU, AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS,R/O. ROAD NO.14, H.NO.250, KRISHNA BRUNDHAVAN COLONY,AMEENPUR, NEAR CHANDA NAGAR, HYDERABAD - 500042. ...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 particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the Pre-Sale Notice/ Auction Notice by way of publication dated 25-02-2026 proposed e- auction scheduled on 25-03-2026 in respect of the mortgaged properties belonging to petitioner as a legal heir of late udatha peddanna issued by the respondent bank without having 30 days time for redemption under sec 8 of securitization and reconstruction act 2002 as illegal, arbitrary, and contrary to the SARFAESI Act, and consequently set aside the Pre-Sale Notice/Auction Notice dated 25-02-2026 and proposed e auction scheduled on 25-03-2026 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 stay all further proceedings pursuant to the said Pre-Sale Notice/ Auction Notice by way of publication dated 25- 02-2026 proposed e auction scheduled on 25-03-2026 in respect of the mortgaged properties belonging to petitioner as a legal heir of late udatha peddanna, pending disposal of the above writ petition Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. KANADHI BHATLA SRINIVASA MURTHY Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. The Court made the following: 3 CMR,J & GTK,J W.P.No.8008 of 2026 ORDER: (Per Hon’ble Sri Justice Cheekati Manavendranath Roy) Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. 2. The petitioner is the legal heir of one of the principal borrowers, who passed away. She seeks to challenge the measures initiated by the respondent-Bank for recovery of the loan amount under the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”), by bringing the secured asset for sale in the public auction. 3. The petitioner got an efficacious remedy of challenging the said measures before the Debts Recovery Tribunal by way of filing an application under Section 17 of the Act, which is a forum constituted under special enactment with specific mechanism for redressal of such grievances. But without availing the said remedy, she has invoked the jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of Constitution of India. Therefore, we are not inclined to entertain the writ petition. 4. Resultantly, the Writ Petition is disposed of with a direction to the petitioner to approach the Debts Recovery Tribunal for redressal of her grievance. There shall be no order as to costs. 5. As a sequel, Miscellaneous Applications pending, if any, shall stand closed. ________________________________________ CHEEKATI MANAVENDRANATH ROY, J _______________________ TUHIN KUMAR GEDELA, J Date : 24-03-2026 BMS