IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE NINTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE Ms. JUSTICE G.ROHINI WRIT PETITION NO : 13608 of 2009 Between: Arram Shiva Shankar S/o. Pullaiah R/o.2-12-293/14, Vidyanagar colony Hanamkonda, Warangal District ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Authorised officer/Branch Manager, State Bank of India Chelpur Branch, Desaipet Road, Warangal District 2 The Regional Manager, State Bank of India, Balasamudram, Hanamkonda, Warangal District ...RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to issue an order or direction more particulalry one in the nature of writ of mandamus declaring that the action of the respondents in seizing the Mahindra Bolero SLX 2WD vehicle of the petitoner bearing Registration No.AP 09TV 3403 by the respondents and the auction notice dated 5.7.2009 issued by the first respondent and published the same in Sakshi Daily News paper, Warangal Edition in putting the said vehicle in auction schedule to be held on 9.7.2009 is highly arbitrary, bad and illegal, and pass such other order or orders as deemed fit and proper. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.P.PRABHAKAR REDDY Counsel for the Respondents: None Appeared The Court made the following: THE HON'BLE Ms. JUSTICE G.ROHINI WRIT PETITION NO : 13608 of 2009 ORDER: The petitioner herein purchased a Mahindra Bolero SLX 2 WD bearing registration No.AP-09TV-3403 for Rs.6,92,000/- by availing a car loan of Rs.4,92,000/- on 10-10-2006 from the respondent-State Bank of India. The loan amount was agreed to be repayable in 84 equal monthly instalments at the rate of Rs.8,105/- per month with interest at the rate of 10.75% per annum, and a Hypothecation Deed and Deed of Guarantee were executed by the petitioner. However, since the petitioner failed to repay the monthly instalments, the vehicle was seized by the respondent-State Bank of India on 01.06.2009. Thereafter, the respondents issued notices dated 04.06.2009 and 29.06.2009 informing the petitioner the amounts due and calling upon him to clear the same, failing which the vehicle would be brought to sale in public auction. Since no amounts were paid, an auction notice was issued by the respondent-Bank proposing to conduct a public auction on 09.7.2009. Aggrieved by the same, the present writ petition is filed seeking a declaration that the action of the respondents in seizing the vehicle and proposing to auction the same as arbitrary and illegal. Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and having regard to the admitted fact that the petitioner having availed the loan from the respondent-Bank on executing a hypothecation deed committed default in payment of the instalments, I am unable to hold that the impugned action of the respondents is arbitrary and illegal on any ground whatsoever. Hence, the interference by this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is unwarranted. The writ petition is accordingly dismissed. No costs. _____________ G.ROHINI, J Dt.09-07-2009 RAR THE HON'BLE Ms. JUSTICE G.ROHINI WRIT PETITION NO : 13608 of 2009 DATED : 09-07-2009