IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE FIRST DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH & THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR WRIT PETITION No.6547 of 2009 Between: 1 Sri Ram Neotia, S/o.late Ramanarayana Neotia, Hindu, R/o. D.No. 27-32-43, 75 Feet Road, Visakhapatnam - 530 001. 2 Raj Kumar Nathanay, S/o. Late S.R. Nathany, Hindu, R/o. D.No. 27-32-43, 75 Feet Road, Visakhapatnam - 530 001. 3 Nirmala Nathany, W/o. L.K. Nathany, Hindu, R/o. D.No. 27-32-43, 75 Feet Road, Visakhapatnam - 530 001. ..... PETITIONERS AND 1 Karnatka Bank Limited, Rep.b y its Senior Branch Manager, 14-25-41, Mahanaripet, Visakhapatnam - 530 002. 2 The Chief Manager & Authorised Officer, Karanataka Bank Limited, Regional Office, T.C. Street, Chennai - 600 001. 3 G.V.V.S.S.S. Anand Prasad, S/o. G.A. Swamy,Hindu, R/o. D.No. 27-32-43, 75 Feet Road, Visakhapatnam - 530 001. .....RESPONDENTS 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 to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction particularly one in the nature of the Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondent NOs. 1 and 2 as illegal and ultra virus to the provisions of Article 14, 19 (1)(8), 21 and Article 300-A of the Constitution of India and violative of principles of natural justice besides directing themnot to dispossess the petitioners from the property bearing Door No. 27-32-43, 75 Feet Road, Visakhapatnam and pass Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.V.S.R.ANJANEYALU Counsel for the Respondent No.: . The Court made the following: Form-NIC-OGS/WP{SPJS} THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH & THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR WRIT PETITION No.6547 of 2009 ORDER: (per Hon’ble Sri Justice V.Eswaraiah) It is the case of the petitioners that they are tenants in respect of the property bearing Door No.27-32-43, situated at 75 feet Road, Visakhapatnam and the 3rd respondent is the owner of the said property. It is further stated that as the rent payable by the petitioners is below Rs.3,500/-, the provisions of the Andhra Pradesh Buildings (Lease, Rent & Eviction) Control Act, 1960 are applicable. It is stated that the 3rd respondent/owner availed a loan from the respondent bank and became a defaulter. Hence, the loan of the 3rd respondent was treated as a non-performing asset (NPA) and proceedings under Sec.13 of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (hereinafter referred to as “SARFAESI Act”) were initiated. It is stated that the petitioners have not been served either with a notice under Sec.13(2) or with an order under Sec.13(4) of the SARFAESI Act. It is stated that as per the Possession Notice dated 28.08.2008 the symbolic possession alone has been taken by the respondent bank. It is stated that disposal of the said property can only be subject to the rights conferred on the petitioners under the Andhra Pradesh Buildings (Lease, Rent & Eviction) Control Act, 1960. We are not inclined to express any opinion on the merits of the case as, admittedly, the petitioners have got an alternative remedy of appeal under Sec.17 of the SARFAESI Act. It is stated that to avail the remedy under Sec.17 of the SARFAESI Act, the petitioners require to file the original certified order/notice under Sec.13(4). Having regard to the facts of the case, we dispose of the writ petition, permitting the petitioner to file an application before Respondents 1 and 2, within a period of one week from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, and on receipt of such application, the respondent bank shall furnish a certified copy of the order under Sec.13(4) of the SARFAESI Act within a period of one week thereafter. Thereupon, the petitioner is permitted to avail the remedy of appeal before the Debt Recovery Tribunal, Visakhapatnam under Sec.17 of the SARFAESI Act within a period of six weeks from the date of furnishing the copy of the order by the respondent bank and seek appropriate interim relief before the Tribunal. If any appeal is filed within the time stipulated, the petitioner shall not be dispossessed or evicted till appropriate orders are passed by the Tribunal on such appeal. There shall be no order as to costs. _____________________ V.ESWARAIAH,J ____________________________ SANJAY KUMAR,J Dated: 01.04.2009 Dsr .... REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1 Karnatka Bank Limited, Rep.b y its Senior Branch Manager, 14-25-41, Mahanaripet, Visakhapatnam - 530 002. 2 The Chief Manager & Authorised Officer, Karanataka Bank Limited, Regional Office, T.C. Street, Chennai - 600 001. 3 2. 2CCs to 4. 2CD copies