IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.RAVINDRAN WEDNESDAY, THE 28TH OCTOBER 2009 / 6TH KARTHIKA 1931 WP(C).No. 17553 of 2008(M) ------------------------------------------ PETITIONER(S): PETITIONER: --------------------------------------------- UNAIZE.H, S/O. HUSSAIN SAHIB, UNAIS MANZIL, ARAFA NAGAR, KAYYALAKKAL CHERI, VADAKKEVILA.P.O, KOLLAM. BY ADVS. MR.S.M.PREM, SMT.K.P.SANTHI, MR.S.S.HUSSAIN, MR.P.K.NIJOY. RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENTS: ---------------------------------------------------- 1. VIJAYA BANK, TRIVANDRUM, REPRESENTED BY THE BRANCH MANAGER. 2. VINOD.S. NAIR, S/O. SADASIVAN NAIR, “SHILPA”, TC 26/2047(1), STATUTORS LANE, VANCHIYOOR, TRIVANDRUM. R1 & R2 BY ADV. MR.K.ANAND,SC, VIJAYA BANK, SMT.LATHA KRISHNAN,SC, VIJAYA BANK. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 28/10/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss WPC.NO.17553/2008 M APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: P1: COPY OF THE SALE DEED EXECUTED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT DTD. 19/09/2007 IN FAVOUR OF THE PETITIONER. P2: COPY OF REPRESENTATION DTD. 2/01/2008 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER. P3: COPY OF THE LETTER DTD. 14/02/2008 OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: N I L /TRUE COPY/ P.S.TO JUDGE Kss P.N.RAVINDRAN,J. ---------------------------------------- W.P.(C) No.17553 of 2008 - M ---------------------------------------- Dated 28th October, 2009 Judgment The loan referred to in the writ petition is a loan availed by the second respondent. The attempt of the petitioner is to close the loan and get back the documents of title deposited by the second respondent as security for the loan transaction. The first respondent Bank contends that besides the said loan, the second respondent has availed another loan from the same branch of the Bank and that as on 19.8.2009 the sum of Rs.47,42,457/- was due from the second respondent. The learned counsel appearing for the Bank also submits that even if the loan referred to in the writ petition is closed, the Bank cannot release the documents of title in respect of the land offered as security. Such being the situation, the petitioner cannot seek a direction to the Bank to release the properties offered by the second respondent as security. The writ petition fails and is dismissed. P.N.RAVINDRAN Judge vaa