IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD WEDNESDAY, THE THIRTIETH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI ANIL R. DAVE And HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE R.SUBHASH REDDY WRIT APPEAL No.469 of 2008 (Writ Appeal under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the Order dated 28/03/2008 in W.P.No.6792 OF 2008 on the file of the High Court) Between: 1. The Allahabad Bank, rep. by its Authorised officer/ Deputy General Manager, Zonal Office, Main Road Himayatnagar, Hyderabad 2 The Branch Manager, Allahabad Bank, Machilipatnam, Krishna District ... APPELLANTS AND 1. M/s. Invent Agro Products Pvt. Ltd., Nagayalanka Road, Chellapalli Village & Mandal, rep. by its Managing Director Y. Diwakar, S/o. Rama Rao, aged about 51 years. 2. Sri Urimi Prabhakar Rao S/o.Not known to the petitioner C/o.Prabhakar Rice Mills, Challapalli village & Mandal, Krishna District. ...RESPONDENTS Counsel for Appellants: Mr. N. SUBBA REDDY Counsel for the Respondents: Mr. KOWTURU VINAYA KUMAR The Court made the following: Judgment: (Per Hon’ble The Chief Justice Sri Anil R. Dave) The learned counsel for the appellants has made a grievance that without hearing the present appellants, learned single Judge has passed the impugned order dated 28-03-2008 in W.P.No.6792 of 2008. It could not be disputed by the learned advocate appearing for the respondents 1 and 2 that impugned order was passed without hearing the present appellants. In the aforesaid circumstances, the learned advocates appearing for the appellants as well as respondents 1 and 2 have agreed to a consent order to the effect that the impugned order be quashed and matter be remanded to the learned single Judge for disposal afresh after hearing all the concerned parties. In the circumstances, the appeal is allowed. The impugned order passed in W.P.No.6792 of 2008 is quashed and set aside, and the matter is remanded to the learned single Judge for his consideration after hearing the concerned parties. In the meantime, the parties shall maintain status quo so far as the possession of the property in question is concerned. The appeal stands disposed of as above with no order as to costs. _________________ ANIL R. DAVE, CJ. April 30, 2008 MRR _____________________ R. SUBHASH REDDY, J.