Neutral citation: ___________ Date of reserved for orders : Date of pronouncement : Date of uploading : APHC010193542026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3332] THURSDAY, THE 25th DAY OF JUNE 2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI WRIT PETITION NO: 10861/2026 Between: 1. SMT. KUSUMANCHI LAKSMI SUNITHA, W/O LATE KAMALAKAR,AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, RESIDING AT. FLAT NO- 0716, GEV RADHA MADAV, BESIDE LALITHA JEWELLERY, VIJAYAWADA- 520010 ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE RESERVE BANK OF INDIA, REP.BY ITS CHIEF GENERAL MANAGER, 1ST FLOOR, AMAR BUILDING, SIR P.M. ROAD, MUMBAI-400 001. 2. M/S TATA CAPITAL HOUSING FINANCE LTD, REP. BY ITS AUTHORIZED OFFICER, RK GALLERIA - 5TH FLOOR, VIJAYAWADA-520008,. 3. UNION OF INDIA, REP BY. ITS SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF FINANCE, JEEVANDEEP BUILDING, NEW DELHI. 110001 ...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 more particularly one in the RC,J W.P No.10861 of 2026 2 nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS declare the action of the Respondents No. 2 in harassing the petitioner and his family members by sending loan recovery agents to house of the petitioner, harassing physically and mentally by making continuous phone calls and humiliating him in front of neighbors without following the guidelines issued by the 1St respondent/Reserve Bank of India vide memo. No. RBI/2022-23/108 dated 12.08.2022 which is illegal arbitrary unconstitutional and violation of Article 14 and 21 of Constitution of India. and consequently to direct the respondent No. 2 to follow the guidelines issued by the 1St respondent/ Reserve Bank of India vide memo. No. RBI/2022-23/108 dated 12.08.2022 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 pleased to direct the respondent No. 2 not to harass ( physically and mentally) the petitioner by sending the recovery agents to house and not to make any phone calls without following the proceedure, pending disposal of main writ petition and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. VM CHIRANJEEVI KOLLA Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. VARAPRASAD NEPPALI 2. RC,J W.P No.10861 of 2026 3 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI Writ Petition No:10861 of 2026 The Court made the following Order: The grievance of the petitioner is that respondent No.2 is allegedly harassing the petitioner and her family members by sending loan recovery agents to their residence for recovery of the loan availed by petitioner’s husband. 2. Heard Sri. V.M.Chiranjeevi Kolla, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri. K.S.Murthy, learned Senior Counsel, appearing for Sri. Varaprasad Neppali, learned counsel for respondent No.2. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that respondent No.2 has been repeatedly sending recovery agents to the petitioner’s residence for recovery of loan amount obtained by petitioner’s husband in violation of the law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in ICICI Bank vs. Prakash Kaur reported in (2007) 2 SCC 711 and ICICI Bank vs. Shanti Devi Sharma reported in (2008) 7 SCC 532 as well as the guidelines issued by the Reserve Bank of India vide Circular No.RBI/2022-23/108 (DOR.ORG.REC.65/21.04.158/2022-23) dated 12.08.2022 and thereby threatening the petitioner and her family members with dire consequences. 4. On the other hand, learned Senior Counsel appearing for respondent No.2, on instructions, submits that respondent No.2 sent his agents to the RC,J W.P No.10861 of 2026 4 premises of petitioner only for the purpose of verifying the property particulars in order initiate appropriate recovery proceedings, in accordance with law. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that recording the submissions made by learned counsel for respondent No.2, the writ petition may be disposed of. 6. Having considered the submissions made by both the learned counsel and in view of submissions made by learned counsel for respondent No.2 that proceedings for recovery of money will be initiated in accordance with law, this Court is of the opinion that no further adjudication is necessary in the present writ petition. 7. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of. However, respondent No.2 is at liberty to take steps available under law for recovery of the loan amount. No costs. Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. ___________________________ JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI Date:25.06.2026 Ksj Whether the order is: Speaking Yes/No / Recorded Yes/No Reportable Yes/No / Non-Reportable Yes/No