HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD.

****

THE HON’BLE JUSTICE MOUSHUMI BHATTACHARYA AND THE HON’BLE JUSTICE GADI PRAVEEN KUMAR WRIT PETITION NO.37868 OF 2025 DATE: 10.12.2025 Between :

Sri M. Nageswara Rao and another … Petitioners Versus M/s. RBL Bank Limited …Respondent Sri Avinash Desai, learned Senior Counsel representing Sri Gangisheetty Srinivas, learned counsel for the petitioners.

Sri Vedula Srinivas, learned Senior Counsel representing Sri S.K. Shabber Ahmed, learned counsel for the respondent Bank.

ORDER: (Per Hon’ble Justice Moushumi Bhattacharya)

1. The Writ Petition arises out of an order dated 12.11.2025 passed by the Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal at Kolkata (DRAT) in Misc. Appeal Diary No.1156 of 2025.

2. The petitioners herein, who are the personal guarantors of the borrower, filed I.A.No.2319 of 2025 in S.A.No.84 of 2024 before the Debts Recovery Tribunal-II, Hyderabad (DRT-II) for stay of all further proceedings initiated by the respondent-Bank pursuant to an e-auction Sale Notice dated 05.08.2025 in respect of the petition schedule property. By the order dated 09.09.2025 passed in the said I.A, the DRT granted interim stay subject to the petitioners depositing Rs.1,80,00,000/- in three equal instalments of Rs.60,00,000/- within the time frames stipulated by the DRT-II. The petitioners deposited the entire amount within the specified time frames and by October, 2025. The respondent-Bank, however, challenged the order dated 09.09.2025 passed by the DRT-II before the DRAT. By the impugned order dated 12.11.2025, the DRAT admitted the Appeal, directed the matter to be listed on 09.01.2026 and stayed the operation of the order dated 09.09.2025 till the next date of hearing.

3. The grievance of the petitioner is that the respondent Bank issued a paper publication on 20.11.2025 for the sale of the secured asset and fixing the date of e-auction on 11.12.2025 (which is tomorrow).

4. We have heard learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner and for the respondent Bank.

5. Apart from the impugned order of the DRAT dated 12.11.2025 being a non-speaking order, we find the action of the respondent Bank to be beyond the bounds of reasonableness and fair play.

6. The paper publication for the e-auction was issued on 20.11.2025 despite the petitioner complying with the conditional order dated 09.09.2025 passed by the DRT-II and depositing the entire amount of Rs.1,80,00,000/- within the stipulated time. It is evident that the respondent Bank took advantage of the non-speaking order of stay and immediately proceeded to initiate steps for the e-auction. The action of the respondent Bank is also questionable for the reason that the DRAT directed the Appeal to be listed on 09.01.2026. Hence, as on the date of hearing of the Appeal, nothing would remain of the secured asset for the respondent Bank to place before the DRAT.

7. We hence deem it fit to set aside the impugned order dated 12.11.2025 passed by the DRAT and to stay all steps taken by the respondent Bank in respect of the secured asset which forms the subject matter of the Appeal before the DRAT.

We make it clear that we have not expressed any opinion on the merits of the dispute between the parties or on Misc. Appeal Diary No.1156 of 2025 pending before the DRAT.

8. W.P.No.37868 of 2025 is accordingly allowed and disposed of in terms of the above. All connected applications stand disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.

__________________________________ MOUSHUMI BHATTACHARYA, J _____________________________

GADI PRAVEEN KUMAR, J DATE: 10.12.2025

va