THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED And THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE NOOTY RAMAMOHANA RAO W.P.No.20883 of 2004 ORDER: (Ghulam Mohammed, J) This writ petition is filed for a writ of Certiorari calling for records pertaining to the order dated 25.6.2004 in F.A.No.331/2003 passed by the 1st respondent-A.P. State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Hyderabad and to quash the same as illegal. 2. The writ petitioner is the Andhra Pradesh Co-operative Housing Society Federation Limited and it had granted a loan of Rs.45,000/-, which is repayable in 20 equal monthly instalments, to the second respondent, at the intervention of the 3rd respondent society, for the purpose of construction of a house. The 2nd respondent is the member of the 3rd respondent society and he executed a mortgage deed in favour of 3rd respondent society by depositing title deeds as security to the above loan amount. The contention of the writ petitioner is that as the 2nd respondent failed to repay the loan amount, they did not release the title deeds. 3. On the other hand, the contention of the 2nd respondent is that the writ petitioner granted loan to him through the 3rd respondent society and he deposited documents of title with the third respondent society as security to the loan amount and he repaid the entire loan amount with interest to the third respondent society. Thereafter, the 3rd respondent society issued ‘No Due Certificate’. As the writ petitioner has not returned the documents of title, which were deposited at the time of obtaining the said loan, the 2nd respondent filed C.D.No.204 of 2000 before the District Consumer Forum, Chittoor against the third respondent society and the writ petitioner and the same was allowed by Award dated 20-01-2003 directing the writ petitioner and the 3rd respondent society to return the documents and to refund the share capital. Aggrieved by the Award, the writ petitioner preferred an appeal in F.A.No.331 of 2003 before the Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission at Hyderabad and the appeal was dismissed on 25.06.2004 confirming the Award dated 20.01.2003. Challenging the dismissal, the writ petitioner has filed the present writ petition. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the District Consumer Forum as well as State Consumer Forum without appreciating the matter in proper perspective in respect of contractual matters arising between the parties, simply upheld the claim of the 2nd respondent. Further, the learned counsel contended that if the 2nd respondent paid any amount to the 3rd respondent society, he should have approached the Civil Court by filing a suit and that the District Forum has no jurisdiction to resolve the matter in question. 5. Heard the learned counsel on either side and perused the record. It is seen that the 2nd respondent executed a mortgage deed in favour of the third respondent society, which in turn executed assignment deed in favour of the writ petitioner. The writ petitioner extended the loan facility to the 2nd respondent at the intervention of the 3rd respondent society. Since the 2nd respondent obtained the loan through the 3rd respondent society and repaid the entire loan amount to the 3rd respondent society, to that effect the 3rd respondent society issued ‘No Due Certificate’, there is no justification on the part of the writ petitioner to detain the documents of title of the 2nd respondent. Further, the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner that the District Consumer Forum has no jurisdiction to resolve the matter in question, cannot be sustained as the dispute between the members of the society and the management of the cooperative society can be resolved by the forum constituted under the Consumer Protection Act,1986. Therefore, we do not find any infirmity in the orders passed by the District Consumer Forum, Chittoor as well as A.P. State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission at Hyderabad. This order will not have any bearing effect on the writ petitioner and the 3rd respondent society. 6. Hence, the writ petition is dismissed. No order as to costs. __________________ GHULAM MOHAMMED,J ________________________ NOOTY RAMAMOHANA RAO,J 06-08-2009 Stp