##PAGE1##

2026:APHC:2648

APHC010038152026

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH

AT AMARAVATI [3558]

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

THURSDAY,THE TWENTY NINETH DAY OF JANUARY

TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX

PRESENT

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE CHEEKATI MANAVENDRANATH ROY

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TUHIN KUMAR GEDELA

WRIT PETITION NO: 2455/2026

Between:

1. S MT. KURRA SUSILA, W/O KURRA MARUTHI SANKAR AGED 43

YEARS, OCC HOUSEWIFE R/O H.NO.43-106/1-52, THOTAVARI

STREET, 6TH LANE, NANDAMURI NAGAR, AJITSINGH NAGAR,

VIJAYAWADA - 15

2. K URRA MARUTHI SANKAR, S/O KURRA VENKATESWARA RAO,

AGED 49 YEARS, OCC BUSINESS R/O H.NO.43-106/1-52,

THOTAVARI STREET, LANE, NANDAMURI NAGAR, AJITSINGH

NAGAR, VIJAYAWADA - 15

...PETITIONER(S)

AND

1. T HE DEBT RECOVERY TRIBUNAL, REPRESENTED BY ITS

CHAIRMAN, VISAKHAPATNAM, VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT,

530001

2. S TATE BANK OF INDIA, REP.BY ITS THE AUTHORIZED OFFICER,

RETAIL ASSETS CENTRAL PROCESSING CENTER (RACPC)-I 1ST

FLOOR, KK TOWERS, M.G.ROAD, NEAR BENZ CIRCLE

VIJAYAWADA CITY, NTR DIST 520001

...RESPONDENT(S):

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the

circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be

pleased toPleased to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in

2

CMR,J &2 0G2T6K:A,JP HC:2648

W.P.No.2455 of 2026

the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS declaring (i) the impugned paper

publication dt.29-12-2025 (published on 30- 12-2025) in Eenadu local

addition viz., Vijayawada Central issued by the 2nd Respondent without

issuing notice to the petitioners to conduct the E- Auction of the subject

property on 16-01-2026, in respect of the house bearing No.43-106/1-52,

Thotavari Street, 6th Lane, Nandamuri Nagar, Ajitsingh Nagar, Vijayawada-

15 fixing the reserve price comparatively less than the prevailing market value

(ii) the action of the 2nd respondent in not passing appropriate orders the

O.T.S application dt.04-12-2025 as directed by this Flonble Fligh Court in

W.P.No.33637/2025 (iii) the action of 2nd respondent in trying to issue the

Sale Certificate in favour of intended auction purchaser without following the

due procedure contemplated under SARFESI Act, 2002 and Rule 9 (1) of

SARFAESI Rules, 2002 as illegal, arbitrary, unjust and violation of principles

of natural justice apart from violation of Article 300-A of Constitution of India

and consequently set-aside the impugned E-Auction Dt 16-01-2026, in the

interests of justice and pass

IA NO: 1 OF 2026

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated

in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased

Pleased direct the 2nd respondent not to issue Sale Certificate in favour of

intended auction purchaser pursuant to the auction conducted on 16-1-

2026, pending disposal of the Writ Petition and to pass

Counsel for the Petitioner(S):

1. M M M SRINIVASA RAO

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

1.

The Court made the following:

3

CMR,J &2 0G2T6K:A,JP HC:2648

W.P.No.2455 of 2026

ORDER: (Per Hon’ble Sri Justice Cheekati Manavendranath Roy)

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners.

2. The petitioners are the principal borrowers. The present writ

petition is filed challenging the paper publication dated 29.12.2025 issued to

conduct E-Auction of the subject property, which is the secured asset.

3. At the time of hearing the writ petition, learned counsel for the

petitioners himself has conceded that auction was already held on 16.01.2026

after receiving the aforesaid paper publication dated 29.12.2025. The validity

of the said auction is challenged on the ground that the 2^nd respondent did not

pass any orders on the OTS application dated 04.12.2025 submitted by the

petitioner as directed by this Court in Writ Petition No.33637 of 2025, and also

on the ground that the auction was conducted without issuing notice to him as

required under Rule 9(1) of SARFAESI Rules, 2022.

4. When the auction was already held and the auction purchaser

was declared as highest bidder, the question of setting aside the impugned

E-Auctio