IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE SEVENTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH and THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR WRIT PETITION No.5253 of 2009 Between: Thelaprolu Venkat Suman Subba Rao, S/o. Veeraiah Gupta, Guarantor of M/s. Iashwarya Silks, Vijayawada, rep. by his GPA holder Sri Chunduru Sitaram Prasad, S/o. Venkateswara Rao, Age: 58 Yrs., Occ: Business R/o. D.No.1-4/5-36, Ram Nivas, K.K.Nagar, V.D.Puram, Vijayawada. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 Canara Bank, Iron Centre, Vijayawada, rep. by its Branch Manager. 2 Canara Bank, rep. by its Authorised Officer, Iron Centre, Vijayawada. 3 M/s. Ishwarya Silks, Governorpet, Vijayawada, rep. by its Managing Partner, Thelaprolu Veeraiah Gupta, S/o.Chinna Subba Rao, Age:63 Yrs. R/o. D.No.27-17-44, V.H.R.Complex, Peddibhotla Vari Street, Governorpet, Vijayawada-2. 4 T. Srinivasa Vamsidhar S/o. T. Veeraiah Gupta R/o. D.No.27-17-44, V.H.R.Complex, Peddibhotla Vari Street, Governorpet, Vijayawada-2. 5 The Debts Recovery Tribunal, Visakhapatnam, rep. by its Registrar. .....RESPONDENT(S) Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court may be pleased to issue order or direction more particularly in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondent No.1 & 2 in issuing Sale Notice dated 12.02.2009 and the action of the respondent No.5 in not passing any orders in I.A.No.109 of 2009 in S.A.No.28 of 2009 on the file of Debts Recovery Tribunal, Visakhapatnam as illegal, arbitrary, against the principles of natural justice and consequently set aside the Sale Notice dated 12.02.2009. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.A.RAJASEKHAR REDDY Counsel for the Respondent No.: . The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH and THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR WRIT PETITION No.5253 of 2009 ORDER: (per the Hon’ble Sri Justice V. Eswaraiah) This writ petition is filed questioning the action of respondents 1 and 2 in issuing sale notice dated 12-02-2009 and the action of the 5th respondent in not passing any orders in I.A.No.109 of 2009 in S.A.No.28 of 2009 on the file of the Debts Recovery Tribunal, Visakhapatnam. The present writ petition is filed by Thelaprolu Venkat Suman Subba Rao represented by his G.P.A. Holder Sri Chunduru Sitaram Prasad. In fact, the petitioner herein also filed W.P.No.5136 of 2009 before this court questioning the action of the Bank in notifying the property of the petitioner for sale. In the said writ petition, this Court, while issuing notice before admission on 13-03-2009 granted stay of sale notice dated 12-02-2009 in respect of item No.1 of the property shown in the auction notice, subject to the condition of the petitioner depositing a sum of Rs.10,00,000/- within three weeks from 13-03-2009. It was made clear in the said order dated 13-03- 2009 that interim stay stands vacated on failure of the petitioner depositing the said sum of Rs.10,00,000/-. Insofar as item No.2 of the property shown in the auction notice is concerned, it was further observed that it is open to the respondent Bank to receive tenders and finalise the same. The learned counsel for the petitioner in W.P.No.5136 of 2006 submits that the G.P.A. given to Sri Chunduru Sitaram Prasad, who filed the present writ petition, was cancelled and he has no power or authority to file the present writ petition. In the circumstances, we are not inclined to express any opinion with regard to the said controversy. A perusal of the material available in the present writ petition indicates that the petitioner has not at all disclosed about filing of W.P.No.5136 of 2009 questioning the sale notice and which was also questioned before the Debts Recovery Tribunal, Visakhapatnam. Therefore, the affidavit sworn to by the G.P.A. Holder that the petitioner has not filed any other case or cases for the same relief, except filing the present writ petition, is incorrect and false. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, the petitioner is not entitled for any relief. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed with costs. Interim order granted on 17-03-2009 stands vacated. ________________ V.ESWARAIAH, J __________________ SANJAY KUMAR, J Date: 07-04-2009 Prv ..... REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1) 2 CD copies Form-NIC-OGS/WP{MSN}