THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA & THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P. DURGA PRASAD WRIT PETITION NO : 22541 of 2011 Dated: 11.8.2011 Between: P. Srinivas Goud ..Petitioner And The State Bank of Hyderabad Branch MSME Medchal I.E., rep., by its Chief Manager, Hyderabad. ..Respondent This Court made the following: THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA & THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P. DURGA PRASAD WRIT PETITION NO : 22541 of 2011 ORDER: (Per Sri Hon’ble Sri Justice N.V. Ramana) The petitioner filed this writ petition seeking a Mandamus to the respondents not to take possession of the property bearing flat No.202 in First Floor, Andal Nilayam bearing Municipal No.6-1-137/7, on plot No.10, in Sy.No.28 of plots No.5 and 6 admeasuring 436 sq. feet and 22 sq. yards situated at Swatantra Colony, Padmarao Nagar, Secunderabad, as the petitioner agreed to pay the outstanding arrears and continue to pay further installments regularly. The petitioner admitted that he obtained loan from the respondent-Bank and he has not discharged the same and therefore, the respondent-Bank initiated proceedings and later on, on the petition viz., Crl.M.P.No.1770 of 2011 filed by the respondent-Bank, the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad passed an order dated 17.5.2011 appointing an advocate-Commissioner for taking possession of the property in question and at that time, the petitioner has given an undertaking to the Advocate-Commissioner promising to pay an amount of Rs.2,00,000/- by 15.6.2011 at 11.30 a.m., and remaining outstanding amount within one week, failing which, he agreed to handover possession of the property on 15.6.2011 at 12 noon. But the petitioner without paying a single pie to the respondent-Bank filed the present writ petition. Learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondent-Bank submits that the petitioner has not paid any amount as undertaken by him and he breached the said undertaking given by him. In the above facts and circumstances, we are not inclined to grant any relief as sought by the petitioner. At this stage, the learned Counsel for the petitioner sought some more time to discharge the debt. Taking into consideration the submission of the learned Counsel for the petitioner, two more weeks’ time is granted to the petitioner to repay the debt. Till such time, status quo shall be maintained with regard to possession of the property in question. If the petitioner fails to pay the debt within the time stipulated above, the respondent-Bank is at liberty to proceed further for recovery of the amount, in accordance with law. With the above direction, the writ petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. __________________ Justice N.V. Ramana DATE: 11.8.2011 ____________________ Justice P. Durga Prasad Note: Furnish C.C. tomorrow. B/o nn THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA & THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P. DURGA PRASAD WRIT PETITION NO : 22541 of 2011 (Order delivered by the Hon’ble Sri Justice N.V. Ramana) 11.8.2011