IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE NINETEENTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 19417 of 2008 Between: Mr. V. Dashrathnetha, S/o. late V. Sanjanna, R/o. 8-4-549/38/1 Near A.G. Colony, nethajinagar, Opp: Hanuman Temple, Erragadda, Hyderabad. ..... PETITIONER AND The Vijaya Bank, Ameerpet Branch, D.No. 6-3-864/4-C, Opposite Greenpark Hotel, Rep. by its Authorised Officer, Cum Chief Manager, Hyderabad. .....RESPONDENT 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 or a direction one in the nature of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in taking the possession of the immovable property of the petitioner bearing No. 8-4-549/38/1, Nethajignagar Near A.G. Colony, Erragadda, Hyderabad is illegal contrary to law and be pleased to pass Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.J.C.FRANCIS Counsel for the Respondent No.: M.V.KINI&CO.ADVOCATES&SOLICITORS The Court made the following : ORDER: This Writ Petition has been ﬁled by Sri V. Dashrath Netha with a prayer to issue a writ or a direction one in the nature of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in taking the possession of the immovable property of the petitioner bearing No.8-4-549/38/1, Nethajinagar, near A.G. Colony, Erragadda, Hyderabad as illegal and contrary to law. The petitioner raised loan from the respondent-Bank and oﬀered the documents relating to his house as a security. The loan granted to the petitioner came to be treated as non-performing asset and thereafter the respondent invoked the provisions of Securitisation and Re- construction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (herein after referred to as “Security Interest Act”. Notice under sub Section (2) of Section 13 came to be issued to the petitioner. The petitioner seems to have not raised any objection and there upon orders under sub-Section(4) of Section 13 came to be passed. The respondent-Bank also ﬁled Criminal M.P.No. 4208 of 2008 under Section 14 of the Security Interest Act, before the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad. At this stage, the petitioner approached this Court invoking jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Notice before admission was ordered on 6.9.2008. The respondent entered appearance through a counsel. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the Bank. Petitioner counsel submits that the very initiation of the proceedings under the Security Interest Act is illegal since the deposit of title deeds is not in accordance with the provisions of law. He also submits that the petitioner paid substantial amount and the balance left over is Rs. 6,00,000/-. The petitioner cannot be permitted to contend at this distance of time that the mortgage by deposit of title deeds is not legally created. Once an order under Sub-Section (4) of Section 13 is passed, there is a remedy available to the petitioner to ﬁle an appeal under Section 17 of the Security Interest Act. The petitioner having failed to avail the eﬃcacious remedy approached this Court invoking jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Since the petitioner has not availed the eﬃcacious remedy available under Security Interest Act, he cannot be permitted to raise objections with regard to the orders passed under Sub-Section (4) of Section 13. Therefore, the Writ Petition is devoid of any merit and the same is accordingly dismissed at the stage of admission. No order as to costs. _____________________________ B. SESHASAYANA REDDY,J Dt. 19.09.2008 KA ..... REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1. 2CD copies