← Library
High Court for State of TelanganaWP/40519/2015dismissed as infructuous

M/S Siri Microfin Society v. The Authorized Officer, Corporation Bank,

2016-07-21C.V.Nagarjuna Reddy,Gudiseva Shyam Prasad3 pages

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY AND THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE G.SHYAM PRASAD W.P.No. 40519 OF 2015 DATED 21ST JULY, 2016 Between:

M/s. Siri Microfin Society, Rep. by its President & Secretary, Shop No. 28, Ucon Plaza, Park Road, Kurnool, and others. ... Petitioners AND The Authorized Officer, Corporation Bank, Kurnool - 518001, and another. ... Respondents Counsel for the petitioners : Sri K.Gopalakrishna Murthy Counsel for the respondents : Smt. V.Dyumani THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING

ORDER: (per Hon'ble Sri Justice C.V.Nagarjuna Reddy) This Writ Petition is filed for the following substantive relief: "For the reasons stated in the accompanying affidavit, it is therefore prayed that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to issue an appropriate writ more in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, ordering the Respondent Nos. 1 & 2 not to take any steps for recovery of the outstanding sum in the account opened in the name of Petitioner No. 1 Society with the Respondent No. 2 Bank pending constitution of Special Courts by the Government enabling the Petitioner No. 1 Society from recovering the sums due from its borrows and pass such other orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case."

2.

At the hearing, there is no representation for the petitioners. Smt. V.Dyumani, learned counsel for the respondents, submitted that, after the impugned sale notification was issued, again the respondents have issued a fresh sale notice, challenging which petitioner No. 1 has filed W.P.No. 16053 of 2016 and that the said Writ Petition has been disposed of for nonprosecution by a separate order passed by this Court today. 3.

Inasmuch as the respondents have not proceeded further in pursuance of the impugned auction notification and instead, they have issued a fresh auction notice, which was the subject matter of W.P.No. 16053 of 2016 which was also dismissed today, the cause in this Writ Petition does not survive for adjudication.

4. The Writ Petition is, accordingly, dismissed as infructuous.

5. As a sequel to dismissal of the Writ Petition, W.P.M.P.Nos. 54135 and 52323 of 2015 shall stand dismissed as infructuous. ________________________ C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J.

___________________ Date: 21-07-016. G.SHYAM PRASAD, J.

JSK