IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.SURENDRA MOHAN THURSDAY, THE 22ND JANUARY 2009 / 2ND MAGHA 1930 WA.No. 122 of 2009 --------------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT IN W.P.(C).NO.12492/2008 DATED 26/08/2008 .................... APPELLANTS/ RESPONDENTS: --------------------------------------------- 1. PERINTALMANNA TALUK RURAL HOUSING CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY, PERINTALMANNA, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. 2. THE SECRETARY, PERINTALMANNA TALUK RURAL HOUSING CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD,PERINTALMANNA, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. MR.WILSON URMESE. RESPONDENTS/ PETITIONERS: --------------------------------------------- 1. K.JANAKIKUTTY, D/O. KADUTHINATTIL AMMA, PERINTHALMANNA, PATHAIKKARA AMSOM. 2. SETHUMADHAVAN, S/O.M.P.DAMODARAN NAIR, KADUTHINATTIL HOUSE, PATHAIKKARA AMSOM, PERINTALMANNA. R1 & R2 BY ADV. MR. MILLU DANDAPANI. THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 22/01/2009,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: prv. K. BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & K.SURENDRA MOHAN, JJ. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ W.A NO: 122 OF 2009 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 22nd January, 2009. JUDGMENT BALAKRISHNAN NAIR, J. Appellants are the respondents in the writ petition. The respondents herein were the writ petitioners. They availed a housing loan from the first appellant/society. Since they defaulted, the society moved and obtained an arbitration award. For executing that decree they moved the Sub Court, Manjeri by filing E.P.93/1997. The said E.P was closed recording the fact that the decree is satisfied. Contending that further amounts are due, the Society moved this Court in revision and the matter was remanded. The E.P was again closed by Ext.P1 order dated 8.12.2003 recording that the decree is satisfied. When the mortgaged property was not released by executing release deed and the original title deeds were not released, the respondents filed the present writ petition. Prayer No:(i) in that writ petition reads as follows:- “Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ or order or direction, commanding the second respondent to execute release deed in respect of the mortgage bond registered with the SRO, Perinthalmanna, in respect of the property of the W.A.No: 122/2009 2 petitioners and also release the title deeds and other documents of the petitioners forthwith.” 2. The learned Judge on finding that Ext.P1 has become final allowed the above prayer. Aggrieved by that judgment this writ appeal is filed. In the meantime the appellant filed a CRP before this Court against Ext.P1. Though it was initially admitted, ultimately it was dismissed as the Society failed to comply with the interim order passed by this Court in that revision. The result is that Ext.P1 has become final. 3. In view of the finality of Ext.P1, we find nothing wrong with the directions of the learned Single Judge. But learned counsel for the appellants submitted that the original title deeds of the respondents are now with the Kerala State Housing Federation. So more time is required for getting the documents released. So for implementation of the direction of the learned Single Judge, some W.A.No: 122/2009 3 time may be granted . We think, for that the appellants may move the learned Single Judge by placing the relevant facts and pray for extension of time. In the result the appeal is dismissed. K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR Judge K. SURENDRA MOHAN Judge jj K.K.DENESAN & V. RAMKUMAR, JJ. ---------------------------------------------------- M.F.A.NO: ----------------------------------------------------- JUDGMENT Dated: