Citly Foods Limited, v. Andhra Bank (Head Office),

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR AND THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE GUDISEVA SHYAM PRASAD W.P.NO.7657 OF 2017 O R D E R (Per the Hon'ble Sri Justice Sanjay Kumar) Prayer of the petitioner in this writ petition is as under: "For the reasons stated in the accompanying affidavit, it is hereby prayed that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to issue an appropriate Writ, Order or Direction, preferably a Writ in the nature of Mandamus, declaring the action of the 2nd respondent - Bank in refusing to permit the petitioner - company to run the operations of the rice mill stands in the name of M/s Sri Gurukrupa Agro Industries, situated in S.No.305/A, 306/AA, 307/AA, 315, 316, 317, Khanapur, Nizamabad - 503 003, in the name of City Foods Limited, Hyderabad as illegal, arbitrary and unjust and pass such other order or further orders, as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case."

It is an admitted fact that S.A.No.329 of 2016 was filed before the Debts Recovery Tribunal, Hyderabad, by M/s Sri Gurukrupa Agro Industries, a partnership firm. By order dated 5.10.2016, the Tribunal made an interim arrangement with regard to operations of the rice mill, the secured asset, over which the Andhra Bank, the respondent herein, is asserting rights pursuant to the proceedings initiated under the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002. The petitioner - company is not a party to the said S.A. It is stated that two of the partners of M/s Gurukrupa Agro Industries are directors of the petitioner - company. Even if that be so, in the light of the

fact that these are two separate entities and as the petitioner - company now wants modification of the arrangement made by the Tribunal in terms of its order dated 5.10.2016 passed in S.A.No.329 of 2016, we are of the opinion that the petitioner - company cannot maintain a writ petition for this purpose. On this short ground, the writ petition is dismissed. This order however shall not preclude the petitioner - company from taking suitable steps in S.A.No.329 of 2016 by getting itself impleaded therein.

Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall also stand dismissed. No order as to costs.

-------------------------------------------- SANJAY KUMAR,J --------------------------------------------- GUDISEVA SHYAM PRASAD DATE:27-07-2017 AVS