THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S. RAO WRIT PETITION No.14410 of 2002 09.9.2009 Between: K.Seshagiri Rao, S/o.Late Narayana Rao … Petitioner and The Mandal Revenue Officer, Memmacheruvu Mandal And others … Respondents THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S. RAO WRIT PETITION No.14410 of 2002 ORDER: Petitioner is allegedly a co-sharer of the property comprised in survey No.106/5 (Acs.12.00) and survey No.106/9/1 (Acs.4.58) situated at Vajinepalli village of Mellacheruvu Mandal in Nalgonda District. It is his case that he and his five brothers and two sisters succeeded to property after death of his father, Narayana Rao. One of his brothers, K.Madhusudhana Rao, promoted M/s.Bhagyalakshmi Garments Limited and availed loan from Andhra Pradesh Industrial Development Corporation (APIDC)–third respondent herein. When there was default by the said company, assets of company were attached and sold by APIDC. As realized value was not sufficient to discharge the debt of APIDC as well as Andhra Pradesh State Financial Corporation (APSFC), at the instance of third respondent action was initiated for recovery of arrears under the provisions of Andhra Pradesh Revenue Recovery Act, 1864 (the Act, for brevity). A notice of attachment under Section 27 of the Act was issued demanding payment of Rs.88,54,000/-. The notice was addressed to K.Madhusudhana Rao, brother of petitioner. As the petitioner alleges that he has a share in property, he filed instant writ petition questioning notice of attachment issued by first respondent. This Court while admitting writ petition stayed further proceedings on condition of petitioner depositing a sum of Rs.3,00,000/- within three weeks. Petitioner thereafter moved an application to extend time by six weeks to deposit the amount. This Court dismissed the application on 28.11.2002. Subsequently interim order passed by this Court was vacated on 05.8.2003. Today, when the matter is called, learned Standing Counsel for third respondent submits that subsequent to filing of writ petition, property attached was sold in a public auction and that the petitioner has no locus standi to challenge the same. Whether petitioner is joint owner of property sold and whether property attached for discharging the debt of the company is valid or not, at this point would be futile to consider, as the property was sold. If petitioner as claimed is joint owner of property, which was attached and sold, he can file a civil suit for partition and work out equities, in such a manner, he will get additional portion towards his share in lieu of land in survey Nos.106/5 and 106/9/1. To that limited extent liberty is reserved to petitioner. However, this order shall not be construed as permitting petitioner to file civil suit or to reopen auction already conducted by APIDC. The writ petition, with the above observations, is accordingly dismissed. No costs. ________________ (V.V.S.RAO,J) September 09, 2009 YS