IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC TUESDAY, THE 5TH JULY 2011 / 14TH ASHADHA 1933 WP(C).No. 9143 of 2011(P) ------------------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------- SYED MOHAMMED ASUMALI, AGED 43, S/O.SYED MUHAMMED, `THUNDIL KIZHAKETHU', VETTOOR P.O., VARKALA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 141. BY ADV. SRI.A.B.MOHANAKUMAR. RESPONDENT: ---------------------- STATE BANK OF INDIA, RACPC, LMS COMPOUND, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 033, REPRESENTED BY ITS ASSISTANT GENERAL MANAGER. BY ADV. SRI.P.V.SURENDRANATH.S.C. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 05/07/2011,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C). NO.9143/2011-P: APPENDIX PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS: EXT.P.1: COPY OF THE LOAN SANCTION LETTER DTD 12/10/2010 ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER BY THE RESPONDENT BANK. EXT.P.2: COPY OF THE LETTER DTD. 07/04/2010 ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER FROM THE RESPONDENT BANK. EXT.P.3: COPY OF THE HAND-WRITTEN LETTER DTD. 04/01/2011 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE RESPONDENT. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: EXT.R1.A: COPY OF THE DOCUMENT SHOWING EXTENSION OF TIME OF THE AGREEMENT FOR SALE ON 07/12/2010. EXT.R1.B: COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DTD. 10/01/2011 ISSUED BY THE BANK. //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE. Prv. ANTONY DOMINIC, J ....................... W.P.(C).9143/2011 ....................... Dated this the 5th day of July, 2011 JUDGMENT The petitioner has approached this Court with the following prayers:- (i). To issue a writ of mandamus or other appropriate writs, direction or order, directing the respondent Bank to release house loan No.HL 7145 sanctioned to the petitioner as per Ext.P1 within a time frame. (ii). Directing the respondent to pay adequate compensation to the petitioner considering the time and money spent by him in connection with house loan No.HL.7145. 2. The grievance projected in the writ petition is that a housing loan of Rs.40,40,000/- have been sanctioned by the respondent but the same has not been disbursed to the petitioner so far. 3. A counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the respondent, in which respondent has produced Ext.R1(b), a W.P.(C).9143/11 2 communication issued to the petitioner on 10th January, 2011 stating that for the reasons mentioned therein, the loan sanctioned on 12th October, 2010 is revoked. 4. So long as the decision to revoke the order sanctioning the loan stands, this Court will not be justified in directing the respondent to disburse any amount to the petitioner. For that reason, the writ petition deserves only to be rejected and I do so. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed anything on merits on the contentions raised by both the parties. ANTONY DOMINIC, Judge mrcs