IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE TWENTY SIXTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA WRIT PETITION NO : 12442 of 2009 Between: Buradagunta Anusha D/o. Abraham Lincon 4/24/42, 7th Lane Mutyalareddy Nagar,Amaravathi Road Guntur District ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Deputy Registrar of Cooperative Societies Guntur, Guntur District 2 The Special Officer Andhra Bank B.C; SC.ST and Minorities Employees Cooperative Credit Society Ltd, Deputy Registrar of Cooperative Societies Kothapet Guntur, Guntur District 3 Sale Officer/Assistant Registrar Divisional Cooperative Officer OPP Sivalayam, Kottapet,Guntur Guntur District .....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 will be pleased to issue any writ order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Mandamus declaring the condition in the impugned order M.A No.17/2009 in O.A No.24/2009 dt 11-06-2009 passed by the A.P Cooperative Tribunal, Vijayawada directing the petitioner to deposit 50% of the amount involved in E.P No.43/2007 and E.P No.44/2007 in RC No.725/05 BI on the file of the 1st respondent on or before 26-6-2009 is abitrary illegal and unconstitutional and set aside the same. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.Y.SUBRAHMANYAM Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR COOPERATION The Court made the following : O R D E R:- The petitioner asserts that she is neither a borrower nor a member of the 2nd respondent-society and the properties she owns are self-acquired properties. While so, the 2nd respondent issued surcharge proceedings against her father for realization of certain amounts, and in pursuance of the surcharge proceedings, the 3rd respondent initiated execution proceedings in E.P. Nos.43 and 44 of 2007 dated 5.6.2007 in R.C.No.725/4-B1 proposing to conduct auction of her properties. Aggrieved by that the petitioner filed a claim petition before the 1st respondent–Deputy Registrar, and it was dismissed. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner filed an Appeal in O.A.No.24 of 2009 along with an application in M.A. No.17 of 2009 seeking interim stay of proceedings in Execution Petitions, and the Tribunal granted stay of the proceedings subject to the condition that the petitioner deposits 50% of the amount involved in each E.P., which condition, according to the petitioner, is arbitrary and illegal. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for Co-operation appearing for respondent Nos. 1 to 3. The order of stay dated 11.6.2009 passed by the A.P. Co-operative Tribunal in M.A. No.17 of 2009 in O.A. No.24 of 2009, grating stay of all further proceedings dated 5.6.2007 in E.P. Nos.43 and 44 of 2007 and directing the petitioner to deposit 50% of the amount involved in each E.P. till the final disposal of the appeal, being an equitable order, and the petitioner having not pointed out any legal infirmities in that order, no interference is called for by this Court therewith in exercise of its jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, Hence, I see no merits in this writ petition, and the same is accordingly dismissed. No costs. _____________ N.V.RAMANA, J 26th June, 2009 bcj