THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE R.SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION No.18289 of 2005 ORDER: This writ petition is filed seeking certiorari declaring the action of the respondents in not giving opportunity to the petitioner in Recovery Petition No.275/2004-2005 as well as CEP.No.367/2004- 2005 on the file of the third respondent, and the proposed auction of sale of his property on 18.08.2005, as null and void. It is the case of the petitioner that one Sri Rangala Shyam, who is a builder and contractor, approached and assured him to arrange housing loan from the first respondent, which is a Cooperative Building Society. Accordingly, he availed loan facility from the first respondent to construct a house on his own site. It is his further case that out of the total sanctioned amount of Rs.1,50,000/-, an amount of Rs.1,36,700/- only was released after deducting an amount of Rs.13,300/- towards service charges. It is his further case that he repaid an amount of Rs.4,367/- on 04.06.2001, Rs.1,000/- on 07.08.2001 and Rs.1,000/- on 15.02.2002. In spite of the same, the first respondent is demanding an amount of Rs.1,47,361/-, without deducting the amounts paid by him. It is stated that without giving any further opportunity to him, the first respondent filed a claim before the third respondent for recovery of an amount of Rs.3,77,938/- on 17.09.2004 along with interest @ 21.5% per annum. Without issuing any notice to him, an award was passed on 29.10.2004 for Rs.3,90,453/- with interest @ 21.5% per annum till realization. It is further stated that subsequently, recovery proceedings were initiated against him including an amount of Rs.50,000/- as additional loan, which was released on 04.06.2001 and was drawn by one Sri R.V.S.Mohan. It is his further case that as the amount of Rs.50,000/- was not released in his loan account, he is not liable to pay the same. It is also his case that on the claim filed by the first respondent before the third respondent, no enquiry was conducted and without giving any opportunity to him, the award was passed, and that the respondents are taking steps to recover the amount covered by such award without giving any further opportunity and proposed to sell his house property illegally and arbitrarily. Detailed counter-affidavit is filed by the first respondent. In the counter-affidavit, it is stated that the petitioner has obtained loan amount of Rs.2,00,000/- from the first respondent society and executed a mortgage deed on 14.02.2001 and the same was registered as Document No.876/2001 in the Office of the Joint Sub- Registrar, Kakinada. It is further stated that as the petitioner failed to pay the instalments regularly, demand notice was issued to the petitioner by registered post on 09.10.2003. Thereafter, as the demanded amount was not paid, the first respondent filed a claim before the third respondent in terms of the loan agreement, seeking to decide the same by way of arbitration. The petitioner appeared before the Arbitrator and deposed evidence. By suppressing the said facts, he has approached this Court. While denying that an amount of Rs.50,000/- was released in favour of a third party, it is categorically stated that the petitioner received all the amounts from the society. It is further stated that before the award was passed by the Arbitrator, reasonable opportunity was given to the petitioner and after giving opportunity only, award, dated 29.10.2004, was passed and the same was sent to the petitioner by registered post with acknowledgment due and was received by him on 21.12.2004. It is also stated that even after the award was passed, as the petitioner has not paid the amount covered by it, the first respondent society has proceeded to recover the same by filing CEP.No.367/2004-2005. Without filing any objection to the notice issued under the provisions of the Andhra Pradesh Cooperative Societies Act, 1964, this writ petition is filed by concealing the material facts. Although it is the case of the petitioner that only an amount of Rs.1,50,000/- was sanctioned by the society, in the counter-affidavit filed by the first respondent, it is categorically stated that the petitioner obtained loan amount of Rs.2,00,000/- by executing a mortgage deed on 14.02.2001 and the same was registered as document No.876/2001 in the Office of the Joint Sub-Registrar, Kakinada. The first respondent denied the payment of Rs.50,000/- towards additional loan to the third party, by name, R.V.Shyam Mohan, as alleged by the petitioner. It is also categorically stated that all the amounts were released to the petitioner only. Even according to the petitioner, except the amounts referred to above, he has not paid the loan amount. In view of the same, as the instalments were not paid as per the agreed terms, the first respondent society has filed a claim against him before the third respondent and an award was passed as early as on 29.10.2004. Although it is the case of the petitioner that he was not given any opportunity in the award proceedings, from the counter- affidavit, it is clear that the petitioner was given opportunity and appeared before the third respondent prior to passing of the award, dated 29.10.2004. Even in the present writ petition also, the petitioner has not questioned the award, dated 29.10.2004, and merely questioned the consequential proceedings to recover the amount covered by such award, on the ground that no notice was given to him. When the award has become final, the petitioner cannot raise any dispute with regard to the amount covered by such award. Although it is the case of the petitioner that the respondents charged exorbitant amount, as he is willing to pay the amount provided the first respondent society grants time, he may be allowed to pay the amount in instalments. But, in view of the fact that the award passed against the petitioner has become final, this Court cannot grant any instalments to him for payment of the amount covered by the award. As much as it is stated by the learned counsel appearing for the respondents that the mortgaged property is not sold to any third party even by this time, I deem it appropriate to grant some time to the petitioner to pay the entire amount due to the first respondent society as per the award, dated 29.10.2004. Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of permitting the petitioner to pay the entire amount covered by the award to the first respondent within a period of six (6) weeks from today. Till such time, no coercive steps shall be taken to sell the subject property. It is made clear that if the amount covered by the award is not paid within the aforesaid time, the first respondent shall take further steps against the petitioner in accordance with law. It is open to the petitioner to approach the first respondent for payment of the amount in instalments. In such an event, it is equally open to the first respondent to consider the same. No order as to costs. ______________________ R.SUBHASH REDDY, J 19th AUGUST, 2010. kvni