IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE TWENTY THIRD DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED and THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR W.P.No.28426 of 2007 Between: Javvadi Jawaharlal Nehru S/o.late Venkateswara Rao R/o.R.R.Pet, Eluru, West Godavari District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Indian Overseas Bank, Rep. by its Manager, Eluru, West Godavari District. 2 The Recovery Officer, Debts Recovery Tribunal, Visakhapatnam. .....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 a Writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of a Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in proceeding with the sale of the properties in R.P.No.28/2003 in O.A.No.269/2002 as published in the Hindu daily dt. 18.12.2007 pending consideration of the application filed in I.R.No.4029/2006 in O.A.No.269/02 on the file of the Debts Recovery Tribunal, Visakhapatnam as illegal, arbitrary, violative of Principles of natural justice and contrary to law and consequently to set aside the said sale notice and pass such other order or orders. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.K.CHIDAMBARAM Counsel for the Respondent No.1: MR.A.KRISHNAM RAJU THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED and THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR WRIT PETITION Nos.28426 of 2007 ORDER: (per Hon’ble Sri Justice Ghulam Mohammed) This writ petition is filed questioning the action of the respondents in proceeding with the sale of the properties by issuing sale notice, as published in the Hindu daily dated 18.12.2007, as illegal and arbitrary. First respondent-bank filed O.A.No.269 of 2002 before the Debts Recovery Tribunal, Visakhapatnam, for recovery of an amount of Rs.49,67,926/-. Subsequently, compromise was entered into between the petitioner and first respondent-bank and O.A. was allowed in terms of the compromise. The petitioner thereafter approached the Debts Recovery Tribunal to recall compromise on various grounds. Simultaneously, the petitioner filed W.P.No.16489 of 2003 and batch before this Court. By order dated 20.10.2003, this Court disposed of the writ petition directing the Debts Recovery Tribunal to dispose of all the petitions pending before it within one month from the date of receipt of the order and till then, no further proceedings shall be taken pursuant to the demand notice. The Debts Recovery Tribunal dismissed all the applications holdings that they are not maintainable. Questioning that order, one of the petitioner in that application filed this writ petition. While ordering notice before admission on 31.12.2007, this Court granted stay subject to the condition of the petitioner depositing Rs.5,00,000/-. Despite granting conditional order as far back as on 31.12.2007, the petitioner has not complied with the said order. We see no reason, therefore, to show any indulgence in favour of the petitioner and interdict the sale proceedings. The writ petition fails and is accordingly dismissed. No order as to costs. __________________________ GHULAM MOHAMMED,J __________________________ VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR,J Dt:23-06-2009 usd