MITTAPALLI HARI KISHAN Vs. STATE OF TELANGANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present writ petition is filed questioning the action of respondent No.3 to receive the sale certificate dtd. 1/7/2023 issued by respondent No.4 presented for registration on 20/11/2023, in respect of part and parcel of industrial land measuring Ac.1-10 gts., in Sy.No.388/1AA/1 and Ac.1-10 gts., in Sy.No.388/AA/2 total extent of Ac.2-20 gts., and RCC and GI roofed mango pulp industry sheds with builtup area of 8160 sq.ft., and plinth area of 17109 sq.ft., situated at H.No.3-99, Peruvancha GP, Kallur Mandal, Khammam District under the guise that there was ad-interim injunction under Order 39 Rule 1 and 2 C.P.C., in respect of the said property issued by the Principal Junior Civil Judge, Sathupally in I.A.No.3 of 2023 in O.S.No.157/2023 suit instituted by one Shaik Subai Pasha against the property owner viz., Kondapalli Srinivasa Rao for recovery of Rs.13,85,000.00and to delete the same from the prohibited property list consequently direct to receive and register the sale certificate presented by respondent No.4 on in favour of the petitioner.

(2.) The brief facts of the case are that respondent No.4/Karnataka Bank Ltd., has granted credit facilities to M/s.Radhakrishna Agro Products represented by its Proprietor Mr.Kondapalli Srinivasa Rao to an extent of Rs.1,50,00,000.00 on 4/6/2018. While availing the credit facilities, its proprietor created security interest over industrial land admeasuring Ac.1-10 gts., in Sy.No.388/AA/1 and Ac.1-10 gts., in Sy.No.388/AA/2 totalling to an extent of Ac.2-20 gts., with built-up area of 8160 sq.ft., and plinth area of 17109 sq.ft., situated at H.No.3-99, Peruvancha GP, Kallur Mandal, Khammam District ('the suit property' hereinafter). The said lands are kept as security deposit for the credit facilities availed. As the borrower failed to repay the loan of sanctioned amount, the loan account was declared as NPA on 28/9/2019 and the said Bank initiated measures under Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Act, 2002 (for short 'SARFAESI Act' hereinafter) by enforcing the security interest over the residential land and building.

(3.) Thereafter, auction was initiated under SARFAESI Act and a demand notice was issued under Sec. 13(2) of the SARFAESI Act calling upon the borrowers to repay the amounts. When the borrowers failed to repay the amount even after 60 days from the date of receipt of notice, respondent No.4 issued possession notice following the procedures prescribed under the SARFAESI Act. In continuation of recovery proceedings, respondent No.4 put the said property for public e-auction on 17/5/2023 by following sale notice on 21/4/2023. Thereafter, petitioner herein purchased the said property for a reserve price of Rs.70,98,987.00 and as the petitioner was declared as highest bidder, sale was confirmed in his name after payment of entire bid amount. Thereafter, respondent No.4 issued sale certificate on 1/7/2023 in petitioner's favour, but respondent No.3 is refusing to register the same under the guise that there was an ad-interim injunction order in respect of the property issued by Principal Junior Civil Judge, Sathupally in I.A.No.3 of 2023 in O.S.No.157 of 2023 which was instituted by one Shaik Subai Pasha against the property owner for recovery of Rs.13,85,000.00.