IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) PRESENT THE HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI ANIL R. DAVE AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT APPEAL NO.381 OF 2009 Dt.30.11.2009 Between: The A.P. State Financial Corporation 52-14-77/1, Near Bulliah College, Visakhapatnam, Rep. by its Senior Branch Manager … Appellant And Smt. D. Lakshmi and others … Respondents Counsel for the Appellant: Sri M.S. Ramchandra Rao Counsel for the Respondent No.1: Sri G. Rama Gopal THE HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI ANIL R. DAVE AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT APPEAL NO.381 OF 2009 JUDGMENT: (per the Hon’ble Sri Justice C.V. Nagarjuna Reddy) This Writ Appeal is filed by respondent No.1 in Writ Petition No.5343 of 2002, which was allowed by the learned Single Judge in favour of respondent No.1 and set aside the sale of property mortgaged by respondent No.1 in favour of the appellant. The learned Judge also directed the appellant to refund the amount payable by respondent No.3 – auction purchaser along with interest at 9% per annum. At the hearing, Sri M.S. Ramchandra Rao, learned Counsel for the appellant, fairly submitted that the learned Single Judge allowed the Writ Petition based on the law declared by the Supreme Court in Karnataka State Financial Corporation v. N. Narasimhaiah[1], wherein it was held that the finance corporations cannot sell the properties mortgaged by the sureties by invoking the provisions of Section 29 of the State Finance Corporations Act. The learned Counsel does not dispute that the said law holds the field. In view of the same, we do not find any error in the order of the learned Single Judge for being interfered with in exercise of our letters patent jurisdiction. For the above mentioned reasons, the Writ Appeal is dismissed. Liberty is, however, given to the appellant to proceed against respondent No.1 for recovery of the dues, if any, in accordance with law. As a sequel to dismissal of the Writ Appeal, W.A.M.P. No.769 of 2009, filed by the appellant – petitioner for interim relief, is dismissed as infructuous. ______________ ANIL R. DAVE, CJ ________________________ C.V. NAGARJUNA REDDY, J 30.11.2009 bnr [1] (2008) 5 SCC 176