APHC010163292026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3575] WEDNESDAY, THE EIGHTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX WRIT PETITION NO: 8376/2026 Between: 1. SHAKTHI IMAGING AND DIAGNOSTIC PVT LTD, COMPANY INCORPORATED UNDER THE COMPANIES ACT, 2013 HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT D. NO. 2-2-24/A/49/A, SOMA SUNDAR NAGAR, D.D. COLONY, AMBERPET, HYDERABAD, TELANGANA. REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR, MR. S.N.S. RANGANATH. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE DEBTS RECOVERY APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, KOLKATA, REP. BY ITS CHAIRPERSON, MINISTRY OF FINANCE, GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, KOLKATA, WEST BENGAL. 2. TATA CAPITAL FINANCIAL SERVICES LTD, A COMPANY INCORPORATED UNDER THE COMPANIES ACT, 1956, REGISTERGED OFFICE AT ONE FORBES, DR. V.B. GANDHI MARG, FORT, MUMBAI - 400001, AND ITS BRANCH OFFICE AT HYDERABAD. ...RESPONDENT(S): CORAM: HON’BLE Mrs. JUSTICE LISA GILL HON’BLE Mr. JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA Present: Mr. N.Subba Rao, Senior Advocate, with Ms. Jyothi Ratna Anumolu, Advocate, for Mr. M.K.Viswanath Naidu, Advocate for petitioner. Mrs. B.Saroj, Advocate (through Video Conference), for Mr. Shireen Sethna Baria, Advocate for respondent No.2. *** WP-8376-2026 -2- LISA GILL,J. This petition has been filed challenging order dated 24.03.2026 passed by the learned Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal (for short “DRAT”) Kolkata, whereby learned DRAT, Kolkata, has directed the petitioner to make a pre- deposit of 35% of amount (Rs.9,25,87,075.16). It is further directed that status quo would be maintained by parties in respect to the machinery in question subject to deposit of Rs.1.00 crore by petitioner with the Registry of DRAT, Kolkata. 2. Grievance raised by petitioner is that learned DRAT has incorrectly directed deposit of Rs.1.00 crore before 30.03.2026, failing which status quo as directed for machinery would be vacated. It is submitted that petitioner is a lessee on the premises though learned counsel for respondent has pointed out that it is a financial lease which was executed between parties, therefore, proceedings under Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (in short “SARFAESI Act”) have been correctly initiated against petitioner. Various other grounds have been urged in this petition before us. 3. However during course of hearing, a consensus has been arrived at between parties. It is agreed that an amount of Rs.1.00 crore shall be deposited by the petitioner with the Registry of learned DRAT, Kolkata by 24.04.2026 instead of 30.03.2026. Learned counsel for respondent No.2, on instructions, submits that respondent-Bank has no objection, in case time WP-8376-2026 -3- afforded to petitioner to deposit said amount is extended to 24.04.2026; however, no further liberty should be afforded to petitioner in this regard. 4. Keeping in view the facts and circumstances as above, this writ petition is disposed of with a modification in the order dated 24.03.2026 to the extent that time afforded to petitioner to deposit the sum of Rs.1.00 crore is extended from 30.03.2026 to 24.04.2026 and that in case of non-deposit of such amount, interim order shall automatically stand vacated. There is no expression of opinion on the merits of the matter. Pending miscellaneous applications are disposed of, accordingly. (LISA GILL) JUDGE (NINALA JAYASURYA) JUDGE Date: 08.04.2026 Ksj