IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH WRIT PETITION NO : 21157 of 2005 Between: 1 Koduru Venkata Samba Siva Rao S/o. Ramaiah R/o. H.No.23-10-43, R.Agraharam Brokers Bazar Guntur-3, Guntur Disrict. 2 Smt. Amara Venkata NAga Sailaja W/o. A. Ramesh R/o. H.No.23-10-43, R. Agraharam Brokers' Bazar Guntur-3 Guntur District. ..... PETITIONER(S) AND 1 The Andhra Bank Specialised SSI Branch Rep.by its Senior Branch Manager Brodipet Guntur District. 2 The Authorised Officer Andhra Bank Korietipadu Guntur Disrict. 3 M/s. Venkata Siva Sai Syndicate rep.by Manager Partner K.V.Samba Siva Rao R/o. D.No.8-23-12/25 1st Line, Nehru Nagar Guntur District. 4 Sri S. Kondaiah S/o. Chinavelu Gondaiah R/o. Padmavathi Towers Laxmipuram, 1st Line, Guntur Guntur District. .....RESPONDENT(S) 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 issue order or orders, direction or directions, writ or writs, particularly one in the nature of "writ of Mandamus" declare the action of the 1st & 2nd respondents in selling the property bearing No.23-10-45 & 46, situated at Brokers Bazar, R.Agraharam, Guntur and Flat.No.5, situated at Laxmi Towers, H.No.5-38-40 at 4/7 Brodipet, Guntur for Rs.31,00,000/- which are worth more than Rs.60,00,000/- is ilelgal, arbitrary, against the principles of natural justice and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India, consequently set aside the sale certificates issued in favour of 4th respondent and to pass such other order or orders as are necessary in the interest of justice. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.K.L.N.SWAMY Counsel for the Respondent No.: MR.N.RAMMOHAN RAO HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V. ESWARAIAH WRIT PETITION NO. 21157 OF 2005 ORAL ORDER: The petitioner questions the action of the respondents 1 and 2 – Bank authorities in selling his property of the petitioner for a sum of Rs. 31 lakhs as illegal and arbitrary on the ground that the value of the said house is 60 lakhs. A counter has been filed stating that the property was already sold in favour of the 4th respondent and the sale certificate was also issued. It is stated that during the sale proceedings, the petitioner approached the debt recovery tribunal and obtained an interim stay of opening of the tender on condition of depositing 10 lakhs before 19.1.2005, but the petitioner did not deposit the amount and therefore, the said case was dismissed and thereafter the Bank received Tenders from the fourth respondent, who is the highest bidder, and accepted the same and issued sale certificate. Therefore, I am of the opinion that unless the petitioner questions the sale proceedings and the sale certificate, he is not entitled for any relief. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is dismissed. No order as to costs. ____________________ V. ESWARAIAH, J Date: 01.04.2008 KA ..... REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1. 2CCs to G.P. for Home, High Court buildings, High Court of A.P. Hyderabad 2. 2CD copies