IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.RAVINDRAN FRIDAY, THE 1ST APRIL 2011 / 11TH CHAITHRA 1933 WP(C).No. 10431 of 2011(D) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- SAINUDHEEN, S/O.MUHAMMED, AGED 34 YEARS, DRIVER, PERUMBULLY HOUSE, AUNDATHODU P.O., PUNNAYOORKULAM DESOM, PUNNAYOORKULAM VILLAGE, CHAVAKKAD TALUK, THRISSUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.P.M.ZIRAJ RESPONDENT(S): --------------- THRISSUR DISTRICT CO-OPERATIVE BANK LIMITED, VADAKKEKAD BRANCH, THRISSUR DISTRICT REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGER, PIN - 682301. BY SRI.P.C.SASIDHARAN, SC FOR RESPONDENT. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01/04/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.N. RAVINDRAN, J. ------------------------------- W.P.(C) No. 10431 of 2011 ------------------------------- Dated this the 1st day of April, 2011 J U D G M E N T The petitioner availed a loan from the respondent bank on 11.1.2005 by mortgaging an item of immovable property belonging to him. This writ petition is filed contending that though the loan was availed on 11.1.2005, the bank did not take steps to recover the loan in time, and therefore, it has become a time barred debt. In this writ petition, the petitioner seeks a direction to the respondent to return the original of the title deed, the encumbrance certificate, tax receipt, possession certificate etc. which were deposited by him with the bank. The petitioner also seeks a declaration that the loan availed by him is a time barred one and the respondent has no right or authority to proceed against him in connection with the said loan. Under Article 62 of the Limitation Act, 1963, the period of limitation prescribed for filing a suit for recovery of money due under a mortgage is 12 years. The period of limitation begins to run from the date on which the money is due. In the instant case, the period of 12 years has not expired. The relief prayed for by the petitioner cannot therefore be granted. Further, as pointed out by Sri.P.C.Sasidharan, learned counsel for the respondent bank, a Full Bench of this Court has in John v. Liquidator (2006 (1) KLT 11 (FB) held that when the rights W.P.(C) No.10431 of 2011 2 and liabilities of the parties are to be decided based the on evidence, no relief can be granted in a writ petition. I, therefore, find no merit in the writ petition. The writ petition fails and is accordingly dismissed. P.N. RAVINDRAN, JUDGE. nj.