THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.7297 of 2008 Date: 17.04.2008 Between: M/s.Padmavathi Commercial Complex and another. … Petitioners AND The Andhra Pradesh State Financial Corporation, Rep by Managing Director, Hyderabad. And another. … Respondents Counsel for the petitioners : Sri B.Chandrasekhar Counsel for the respondents: Sri Y.V.Ravi Prasad. HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.7297 of 2008 ORDER:- This writ petition is filed for a writ of mandamus to declare the action of the respondents in not releasing the documents pertaining to Door No.4/134, 4/120, 4/230 situated at Nagarajupeta, Kadapa town, which were handed over to the respondents towards collateral security, as arbitrary and illegal. Heard Sri K.Raja Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri Y.V.Ravi Prasad, learned Standing Counsel for respondents. Respondent No.1 sanctioned a term loan of Rs.10 lakhs to the petitioner No.1 firm for constructing a commercial complex over land admeasuring 480 sq.yards in Kadapa town in October, 1996 vide loan account No.54336210. A sum of Rs.9,06,500/- was disbursed to petitioner No.1 firm. In addition to mortgaging the constructed area over the site, the petitioners mortgaged three buildings mentioned above towards collateral security. Since, the petitioners failed to repay the loan amount, the property furnished as primary security was sold on 20.3.2001 by the respondents and a registered Sale Deed was executed on 21.3.2001 by them in favour of the purchaser. The petitioners filed W.P.No.10768 of 2001 questioning the said sale and the said writ petition is pending. The present writ petition is filed to direct the respondents to return the documents which are handed over to the respondents towards collateral security. The main contention of the learned counsel for the petitioners at the hearing, is that as against the loan amount of Rs.11,22,528/-, the respondents have realized a sum of Rs.22 lakhs by sale of property covered by the primary security and hence, there is no justification for the respondents to keep the documents furnished as collateral security. At the hearing, Sri Y.V.Ravi Prasad, learned Standing Counsel submitted that before filing this writ petition, the petitioners have not approached the respondents with a request to release the collateral security and that, had the petitioners made such a request the respondents would have considered the same. The law is well settled that before seeking a writ of mandamus it is incumbent upon the petitioners to issue a notice calling upon the respondents to comply with their demand and if the respondents failed to do so, the petitioners would be entitled to approach this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. (See Kamini Kumar Das Chaudhary Vs. State of West Bengal – AIR 1972 SC 2060 and Amrit Lal Berry Vs. Collector of Central Excise, Central Revenue - AIR 1975 SC 538). Admittedly, the petitioners failed to follow this procedure. In the light of the submission made by the learned Standing Counsel that the respondents would consider the request of the petitioners for release of collateral security having regard to the fact that the money in excess of the loan amount had already been realized by sale of primary security albeit the fact that the writ petition filed by the petitioners is pending, the present writ petition is disposed of by permitting the petitioners to make a representation to the respondents for release of collateral security and on receipt of such representation, the respondents shall dispose of the same within two weeks. Subject to the above observation, the writ petition is disposed of. As a sequel to disposal of the writ petition, W.P.M.P.No.9593 of 2008 filed by the petitioners seeking interim relief is also dismissed. ___________________________ C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY,J Date:17.04.2008 mdaa