IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC FRIDAY, THE 16TH JANUARY 2009 / 26TH POUSHA 1930 WP(C).No. 26707 of 2008(D) ----------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ----------------------- K.J.VINCENT, AGED 40 YEARS, S/O.J.JOHNSON, KIZHKKEMURIYIL, YENTHAYAR P.O., IDUKKI DISTRICT. BY ADV. SMT.MIJI JOHN RESPONDENT(S): --------------------------- 1. KOOVAPPALLY HABITAT FOR HUMANITY PROJECT REG.NO.K.492/89, REPRESENTED BY CO-ORDINATOR, SOCIETY FOR INTEGRAL DEVELOPMENT ACTION (SIDA). 2. MATHEW, AGED 55 YEARS, S/O.THOMAS, PARATHANAM, EDAKKUNNAM KARA, MUNDAKKAYAM VILLAGE. 3. GEORGE THOMAS, 55 YEARS, PRESIDENT, KOOVAPPALLY HABITAT FOR HUMANITY PROJECT. *ADDL.R4 IS IMPLEADED: R4.THE HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION(HUDCO) REPRESENTED BY ITS REGIONAL MANAGER, 3RD FLOOR, SPHALAYAM COMPLEX PALAYAM, TRIVANDRUM – 34. (*ADDL.R4 IS IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DTD. 4/11/2008 IN I.A.NO.13737/08) ADV. SRI.SUNIL JACOB JOSE FOR R1 & 3 SRI.K.R.KURUP FOR ADDL.R4 SRI.C.R.SYAMKUMAR FOR ADDL.R4 SRI.JOSE KURIAN FOR ADDL.R4 SRI.K.J.ABRAHAM FOR ADDL.R4 SRI.LAVARAJ M.G. FOR ADDL.R4 SRI.C.R.VINOD KUMAR FOR ADDL.R4 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 16/01/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss WPC.NO.26707/2008 D APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1: COPY OF THE RECEIPT DTD. 22/03/07 & MORTGAGE PASS BOOK. EXT.P2: COPY OF THE RE-CONVEYANCE DEED DTD. 29/03/2007. EXT.P3: COPY OF THE WRITTEN REQUEST OF THE PETITIONER TO THE RESPONDENT SOCIETY DTD. 4/04/2007. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: N I L /TRUE COPY/ P.A.TO JUDGE Kss ANTONY DOMINIC, J. --------------------------- W.P.(C) No. 26707 of 2008 ------------------------------------ Dated this the 16th day of January, 2009 JUDGMENT Petitioner submits that he had deposited his title deeds with the first respondent for availing of financial assistance and that though the loan has been fully discharged, documents have not been returned. It would appear that the first respondent in turn deposited those documents with additional 4th respondent and availed financial assistance. 2. In this writ petition though the additional 4th respondent accepts that the documents are in their possession, justification offered for non-release of documents is that the first respondent has not repaid the amount that is due to it. 3. Admittedly, there is no privity of contract between the petitioner and additional 4th respondent and therefore the refusal to release the title deeds deposited by the petitioner is illegal. Taking into account the detention of the documents, this writ W.P.(C) No. 26707/2008 2 petition is disposed of directing the additional 4th respondent to return the documents belonging to the petitioner on the receipt of copy of this judgment and as expeditiously as possible, at any rate within four weeks of production of copy of this judgment. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE scm