IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC MONDAY, THE 3RD MARCH 2008 / 13TH PHALGUNA 1929 W.P(C).No. 4215 of 2008(B) ---------------------------------- PETITIONERS: ---------------- 1. P.S.SURESH KUMAR, S/O. PURUSHOTHAMAN, HOUSE NO.204, CHANDHANA VEEDU, KUTTANVILA ROAD, MARUTHAMKUZHY, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 035. 2. B.T.JIJI, W/O. P.S.SURESH KUMAR, HOUSE NO.204, CHANDHANA VEEDU, KUTTANVILA ROAD, MARUTHAMKUZHY, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 035. BY ADV. SRI.M.RAMASWAMY PILLAI SRI.P.M.JOSEPH RESPONDENTS: ----------------- 1. UNION OF INDIA, REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF FINANCE, NEW DELHI. 2. CATHOLIC SYRIAN BANK LTD., REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN, REGISTERED OFFICE, THRISSUR. 3. THE CATHOLIC SYRIAN BANK LTD., NALANKARA BUILDINGS, UNIVERSITY CAMPUS P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 034, REP. BY ITS CHIEF MANAGER. BY ADV. SRI.P.PARAMESWARAN NAIR, ASST.SOLICITOR SRI.C.A.JOY,SC FOR R2 & R3 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03/03/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. =============== W.P.(C) NO. 4215 OF 2008 B ==================== Dated this the 3rd day of March, 2008 J U D G M E N T The petitioners had availed of three loans from the respondent Bank. It is stated that when default was committed in repayment, Exts. P4, P5 and P6 notices under Section 13(2) of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act were issued proposing action against the properties mortgaged towards the security for the aforesaid three loans. According to the petitioners, they were willing to clear the loans one by one and sought release of the documents of the loan so cleared and that was declined by the Bank. At that stage, this writ petition has been filed and the main request made by the counsel for the petitioners is that on the petitioners settling the liabilities one by one, the respective securities should be released by the Bank. According to the petitioners, they want to dispose of the same in order to raise WPC 4215/08 :2 : funds to liquidate the remaining debts. Like that they want to settle all the liabilities, submits the counsel. 2. This request made by the counsel for the petitioners is opposed by the Bank. According to the Bank towards the three liabilities of the petitioners, about Rs.20,70,000/- is due from the petitioners. Although the counsel for the Bank submits that the liabilities are separate and distinct and the properties mortgaged as security are also different, Bank would assert for the position that it is entitled to exercise general lien available under Section 171 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872 on the properties mortgaged. I am not in a position to agree with the counsel for the Bank in his contention. As already noticed, there are three separate loans for which separate securities have been offered by the petitioners and no security is common for any other liability of the petitioners. 3. Bank has no case in the counter affidavit that the security offered by the petitioners for any liability is inadequate to discharge that particular liability. Only in such a case can the Bank have a claim to exercise their general lien even if it is WPC 4215/08 :3 : accepted that the Bank has any such general lien. In this case, since the security offered by the petitioners is adequate for the Bank to realise its dues, I am not prepared to uphold the Bank's refusal to release the title deeds deposited by the petitioners and create a situation where it is impossible for them to discharge the liabilities. 4. Facts being so, this writ petition is disposed of directing the Bank to release the properties mortgaged and the title deeds deposited by the petitioners on full satisfaction of the amounts that are due towards the loans for the security of which the property is mortgaged. Writ petition is disposed of as above. ANTONY DOMINIC,JUDGE. Rp