APHC010478812024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH Bench Sr.No:-63 [3483]

AT AMARAVATI Writ Petition Nos: 24679 and 24681 of 2024 IKF Finance And Investments Limited ...Petitioner Vs.

The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others ...Respondent(s)

**********

Advocate for Petitioner: Mr. Ambatipudi Satyanarayana, Senior Counsel, appearing vice Mr. V V L N P Murthy Advocate(s) for Respondent(s): GP for Registration And Stamps CORAM : T HE CHIEF JUSTICE DHIRAJ SINGH THAKUR SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI DATE : 24th January 2025 PER DHIRAJ SINGH THAKUR, CJ:

Since the issues raised in the present petitions are common, it is proposed to dispose of the same by way of common judgment and order. The present petitions have been filed seeking a mandamus to the registering authority i.e., the Sub-Registrar, Stamps and Registration Department – respondent No.2 to register the sale certificate, dated 11.10.2024, in W.P. No. 24679 of 2024, and sale certificate, dated 04.10.2024, in W.P. No. 24681 of 2024. The sale of the properties, which were secured assets, were effected by the petitioner Financial Institution by invoking the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002, on account of the failure of the borrowers/guarantors to repay the loan amount. The registering authority, it appears, has refused registration of sale certificates on account of the fact that there were orders of attachment, dated 09.08.2021, in reference to W.P. No. 24679 of 2024 and W.P. No. 24681 of 2024 passed by the civil Court, which prevented the registering authority from registering the sale certificates.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner, on the other hand, would submit that notwithstanding the fact that civil Courts had issued the orders of attachment, yet the mortgages had been created with the Petitioner Financial Institution much earlier to the passing of the orders of attachment. It is stated that on the properties covered in W.P. No.24679 of 2024 and W.P. No. 24681 of 2024, mortgage was created on 31.01.2017, much before the orders of attachment passed by the civil Court.

3. The issue as to whether the registering authority can refuse to register the sales certificate on account of an order of attachment is already settled by this Court in its judgment and order, dated 04.12.2024, in the case of M/s. Manasa Hotels Private Limited v. Union of India and others, W.P. No. 12458 of 2024. The Judgment and Order supra had followed the view expressed by the erstwhile

High Court of Andhra Pradesh in the case of City Union Bank Ltd. v. Sub-

Registrar, Peddapalli, Karimnagar district and others, 22018 SCC Online Hyd 370 .

The ratio of the judgments supra is that attachments affected subsequent to the mortgage created in favor of the secured creditor, do not affect the rights of the secured creditor over the subject property and such attachments have no impact on the sale conducted under the Act.

4. Be that as it may, having already expressed a view by this Court in the case of M/s. Manasa Hotels Private Limited (supra), we allow these petitions and direct the respondents to register the sale certificates in accordance with the provisions of the Registration Act on payment of the requisite registration fee, notwithstanding the existence of the orders of attachment, dated 09.08.2021, in reference to W.P. No. 24679 of 2024 and W.P. No. 24681 of 2024, passed by the civil Court. No costs.

Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed.

DHIRAJ SINGH THAKUR, CJ RAVI CHEEMALAPATI, J akn

275 HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE DHIRAJ SINGH THAKUR, CHIEF JUSTICE &

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI Writ Petition Nos: 24679 and 24681 of 2024 DATE : 24.01.2025 AKN