IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM TUESDAY, THE 15TH MARCH 2011 / 24TH PHALGUNA 1932 WP(C).No. 38389 of 2010(W) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- ABIDE.C.H,S/O.MUHAMMED, MURIYANAVI, PO KANHANGAD, KASARAGOD. BY ADV. SRI.S.MOHAMMED AL RAFI RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. NORTH MALABAR GRAMIN BANK, REP.BY AUTHORISED OFFICER,GENERAL MANAGER, KANNOOR 670 004. 2. BRANCH MANAGER,NORTH MALABAR GRAMIN BANK,TALIPARAMBA, TELLICHERI 670 004. 3. MUHAMMED NAHAZ,S/O.BABAKUNHI, NOUSHAD MANZIL,KUNNIKODE PO, VILAKUZHI VILLAGE, PATHANAPURAM TALUK, KOLLAM 691 508. 4. M.SALEENA,W/O.MUHAMMED NAHAZ, NOUSHAD MANZIL,KUNNIKODE PO, VILAKUZHI VILLAGE, PATHANAPURAM TALUK, KOLLAM 691 508. BY SRI.DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN - SC THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 15/03/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: C.K.ABDUL REHIM, J --------------------------------------- W.P(C) No.38389 of 2010-W ---------------------------------------- Dated this the 15th day of March, 2011. J U D G M E N T The petitioner claims to be a bonafide purchaser of an immovable property, having extent of 61 cents, comprised in Re- survey No.1A2 of Cheruthazham Village. The purchase was made from the respondents 3 and 4, on 1.6.2009, by virtue of document No.2186/2009. According to the petitioner, since the date of purchase, he is enjoying the property by effecting mutation and by paying the land tax. There was a charge created on the property by respondents 3 and 4 with respect to a loan availed by them from respondents 1 and 2, which was concealed at the time of the sale. Consequent to default committed by respondents 3 and 4, proceedings under the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (SARFAESI Act) was initiated. The petitioner had approached this Court on an earlier occasion by filing W.P(C) No.7266/2010. In Ext.P3 judgment wherein this Court permitted the petitioner to pay off the entire liability, in a phased manner, in six equal monthly instalments. It W.P(C) No.38389 of 2010-W 2 is submitted that the petitioner had effected payments of the entire amounts due to respondents 1 and 2, in compliance with the directions contained in Ext.P3 judgment. Grievance voiced in this writ petition is that, inspite of such payment, the respondents 1 and 2 are not returning title deeds and other records pertaining to the property, which is kept in their custody for securing the loan transaction. 2. Inspite of notices issued from this Court to respondents 3 and 4, there is no appearance and they have not chosen to contest the matter. It is evident that the title of the property stands already transferred, by virtue of a registered sale deed executed by respondents 3 and 4. It is further evident from Exts.P1 and P2 that the mutation in land registry was effected into the name of the petitioner and the petitioner is paying land tax as well as property tax due on the building situated in the property. It is evident that the petitioner had effected payment of the balance amounts outstanding in the loan account. Under such circumstances, I am of the view that it is only just and proper to direct the respondents 1 and 2 to return the title deeds to the petitioner, who is the present owner of the property. W.P(C) No.38389 of 2010-W 3 3. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of directing the respondents 1 and 2 to return the title deed and other documents pertaining to the property, if the petitioner had remitted the entire amounts due under the loan account. 4. It is further made clear that by return of the title documents pursuant to the above directions, the respondents 1 and 2 will be discharged from any claim which may be raised by respondents 3 and 4. However, by virtue of return of the title deeds no rights will be conferred on the petitioner nor it will cause any prejudice to rights or disputes if any available to respondents 3 and 4 on the title of the property. C.K.ABDUL REHIM JUDGE ab