IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT :- THE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.H.L.DATTU & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.M.JOSEPH TUESDAY, THE 1ST APRIL 2008 / 12TH CHAITHRA 1930 WA.No. 710 of 2008 --------------------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT IN WPC.5281/2008 Dated 25/02/2008 .................... APPELLANT: PETITIONER:- ------------------------------------- S.NALINAKUMARI, W/O S.MOHANKUMAR, ELLUVILA VEEDU, KOVILOOR, KUDAPPANA MOODU, TRIVANDRUM. BY ADV. SRI.S.MOHAMMED AL RAFI RESPONDENTS: RESPONDENTS:- ---------------------------------------------- 1. THE FEDERAL BANK, REPRESENTED BY CHIEF MANAGER, REGIONAL TOWERS, M.G.ROAD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE MANAGER, FEDERAL BANK, AMBOORI BRANCH, TRIVANDRUM. 3. THE AUTHORISED OFFICER, FEDERAL BANK, REGIONAL OFFICE, FEDERAL TOWERS, M.G.ROAD, TRIVANDRUM. 4. THE MANAGER, FEDERAL BANK, NEYYATTINKARA BRANCH, TRIVANDRUM BY STANDING COUNSEL.SRI.GEORGE VARGHESE (MANACHIRACKEL) ADV.SMT.ANJU MEERA BIRLA ADV.SRI.K.J.CHACKOCHAN THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01/04/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: H.L.DATTU, C.J. & K.M.JOSEPH, J. ------------------------------------------------------ W.A.No.710 of 2008 ------------------------------------------------------- Dated, this the Ist day of April, 2008 JUDGMENT H.L.Dattu, C.J. Whether a writ petition is maintainable against the respondent Bank or not is the moot question which we do not intend to answer in this writ appeal. This issue may be considered in appropriate proceedings, for the reason that the Bank is agreeable to certain suggestions made by the learned counsel appearing for the appellant. (2). The appellant has taken 5 loans from the respondent Bank. It appears that, for each loan the appellant has offered security of immovable properties. (3). Since the appellant has defaulted in paying the amounts due to the Bank, the Bank has initiated certain recovery proceedings against the appellant. It is at that stage, the appellant/petitioner was before this Court, inter alia, seeking a direction to the Bank to allow her to clear off 3 loans namely, ODCC No.88, DL 296 and IPS 76 and to hand over all the documents with respect to the above mentioned loans to the appellant/petitioner immediately. (4). The learned Single Judge has disposed of the writ petition by his order dated 25th February, 2008. (5). Aggrieved by the order so passed by the learned Single Judge, the petitioner in the writ petition is before us in the appeal. W.A.No.710/2008 -2- (6). The learned counsel appearing for the appellant would submit that in respect of 2 loans namely DL 296 and IPS 76, the petitioner had mortgaged lands in Sy.No.736/15 and Sy. No.726/7. According to the appellant, she has discharged those 2 loans by paying a sum of Rs.5,55,000/- to the respondent Bank. Therefore, a request is made by the learned counsel for the appellant to direct the respondent Bank to return the documents mortgaged to the Bank while taking the loans namely, DL 296 and IPS 76. The learned counsel for the appellant also submits that whatever amounts due to the Bank in respect of the other 3 loans, the appellant would discharge the same within four months, after receiving the documents pertaining to the lands in Sy.No.736/15 and 726/7. (7). On instruction, the learned counsel for the respondent Bank would submit that the Bank is agreeable to return the documents pertaining to the lands in Sy.No.736/15 and 726/7, provided this Court directs the appellant to discharge the entire loan liabilities of the Bank within a reasonable time. (8). Admittedly, the appellant has taken 5 loans. According to her, she has discharged 2 loans. It is the case of the appellant that for each loan taken from the Bank she had executed separate mortgage deeds. If the appellant has discharged the loans namely DL 296 and IPS 76 by paying Rs.5,55,000/-, in our opinion, there is no impediment for the Bank to release the documents offered as security for receiving the aforesaid loans. The other request of the learned counsel for the appellant for payment of the balance amount to the Bank within four months from today, in our opinion, is W.A.No.710/2008 -3- also reasonable and if it is granted, it will not cause any prejudice to the respondent Bank. (9). In view of the above, without going into the other details of the writ appeal, the same is disposed of as under: Order (i). The respondent Bank shall return the documents pertaining to lands in Sy.No.736/15 and Sy.No.726/7 which had been mortgaged by the appellant to secure the two loans namely DL 296 and IPS 76 within 15 days from today. (ii). The appellant shall discharge the entire loan liabilities of the respondent Bank within 4 months from today. (iii). If for any reason, the appellant commits any default, the respondent Bank is at liberty to initiate appropriate proceedings against the appellant to recover all the amounts due from her. (10). I.A.No.329/2008 to receive documents is allowed. Ordered accordingly. (H.L.DATTU) CHIEF JUSTICE (K.M.JOSEPH) JUDGE MS