IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.T.RAVIKUMAR WEDNESDAY, THE 27TH OCTOBER 2010 / 5TH KARTHIKA 1932 WP(C).No. 32670 of 2010(G) ---------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ----------------------- 1. SREEDHARAN, NIVARTHIL, CHERTHALA KIZHAKKUM MURI, CHERTHALA. 2. FRANCIS, ARYADANVATHUKKAL, NEDUMBRAKAD, CHERTHALA P.O. BY ADV. SRI.J.OM PRAKASH RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- 1. THE JOINT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES (GENERAL), ALAPPUZHA-688 001. 2. THE CHERTHALA SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD. NO.1688, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, CHERTHALA P.O., 688 524. 3. THE VILLAGE OFFICER, VAYALAR KIZHAKKU VILLAGE, VAYALAR P.O., CHERTHALA, 688 536. R1 & R3 BY GOVT. PLEADER MR.K.C. SANTHOSH KUMAR. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 27/10/2010,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: rs C.T. RAVIKUMAR, J. -------------------------------------------- W.P.(C). NO.32670 OF 2010 -------------------------------------------- Dated this the 27th day of October, 2010 JUDGMENT The first petitioner is the owner in possession of 50 cents of property comprised in Sy.No.51/1/70 of Vayalar East Village. He had availed a loan of Rs.10,000/- from the second respondent -bank. The aforesaid property was mortgaged as security. The contention of the first petitioner is that he had paid off the entire liability arising out of the said loan transaction and even then, the second respondent did not release the documents. Earlier, on account of the failure on the part of the petitioner in remitting the instalments towards the said loan account, the second respondent was constrained to resort to arbitration proceedings. A.R.C.No.894/1998 filed by the second respondent-bank culminated in an award in their favour. The contention of the first petitioner is that pursuant to the award, he had cleared off the entire arrears and thus satisfied the award. Even thereafter, the loan account was not closed and no release deed was executed by the second respondent. In the circumstances, he has approached the first respondent by filing Ext.P11 representation. This W.P.(C) NO.32670/2010 2 Writ Petition has been filed on being aggrieved by the delay in the matter of disposal of Ext.P11. 2. Admittedly, the said representation is still pending before the first respondent. In the circumstances, without making any observations as to the merits of the contentions raised in this Writ Petition, it is disposed of with a direction to the first respondent to consider and pass orders on Ext.P11representation expeditiously, at any rate, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment with notice to the first petitioner and the second respondent-bank. (C.T. RAVIKUMAR, JUDGE) spc W.P.(C) NO.32670/2010 3 C.T. RAVIKUMAR, J. JUDGMENT September, 2010 W.P.(C) NO.32670/2010 4