IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM WEDNESDAY, THE 21ST OCTOBER 2009 / 29TH ASWINA 1931 WP(C).No. 28711 of 2009(H) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- 1. SMT.A.V.ROSY D'SOUZA, MATTATHIL, CMC 23, CHERTHALA 2. M.N.JAYAPRASAD, MATTATHIL HOUSE, CMC 2, CHERTHALA. BY ADVS. SRI.S.EASWARAN SRI.P.MURALEEDHARAN (IRIMPANAM) RESPONDENT(S): --------------- THE STATE BANK OF TRAVANCORE, CHERTHALA BRANCH, REP.BY ITS CHIEF MANAGER, BY ADV. SRI. SATHISH NINAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 21/10/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: shg/ C.K. ABDUL REHIM, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P.(C)No. 28711 of 2009 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 21st day of October, 2009 J U D G M E N T 1. Petitioners are husband and wife. The 1st petitioner had availed different loans from the respondent Bank with respect to business activity of textile showroom conducted by the 1st petitioner in Cherthala Town. Consequent to default committed in repayment of loan amounts, the respondents Bank had initiated proceedings under the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (SARFAESI Act) and Ext.P1 notice under Section 13 (2) was issued. Subsequently the petitioners have approached the respondent Bank and remitted the amounts due in one of the loan accounts, which is a cash credit facility as evidenced by Ext.P2 (a) to Ext.P2 (h) receipts. Grievance projected in this writ petition is that, the properties mortgaged in order to secure the cash credit facility was W.P.(C)No. 28711 of 2009 -2- not released to the petitioners inspite of full and final settlement of the said loan account. 2. The respondent Bank through a statement filed contended that eventhough one of the loan account (the cash credit facility) was closed, there are other loan accounts outstanding clearance in payment availed by the petitioners. It is further stated that the property with respect to which release was sought for, is also secured with respect to the other loans. Annexure R-1 Memorandum of Deposit of Title Deeds, which is executed by the 1st petitioner, revealed that the 1st petitioner had undertaken that mortgage is created with respect to the amounts due to the Bank with respect to the credit facility extended to her and also with respect to any other credit facility that may be granted to her by the Bank thereafter. It is further stated that a similar document of Memorandum of Deposit of Title Deeds was executed by the 2nd petitioner also. Since the property in question is the secured asset with respect to other loan transactions, it cannot be W.P.(C)No. 28711 of 2009 -3- released, is the contention. 3. Having confronted with the above situation, learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the 1st petitioner is ready and willing to pay off the liability with respect to the other loan accounts in which her properties are pledged. Learned standing counsel for the respondent submitted that there will not be any impediment in releasing the property if the loan account pertaining to which the property is mortgaged, is closed. Under the above circumstances the writ petition is disposed of reserving freedom to the petitioner to approach the Bank to settle payment with respect to the other loan accounts and to seek release of the properties mortgaged. 4. It is further submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that the 1st petitioner is prepared to remit the entire amount due in the personal loan account and on such payment direction may be issued to release the property belonging to the 1st petitioner forthwith. It is needless to say that if payment is effected in full discharge W.P.(C)No. 28711 of 2009 -4- the respondent Bank shall release the documents forthwith thereafter. C.K. ABDUL REHIM JUDGE shg/