IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WA.No. 1818 of 2009(B)
1. BALAKRISHNA MENON
... Petitioner
Vs
1. SBI
... Respondent
For Petitioner :SRI.JOMY GEORGE
For Respondent :SRI.S.SREEKUMAR
The Hon'ble the Chief Justice MR.S.R.BANNURMATH
The Hon'ble MR. Justice A.K.BASHEER
Dated :05/11/2009
O R D E R
S.R.Bannurmath, C.J. & A.K. Basheer, J.
------------------------------------------
W.A. No.1818 of 2009
------------------------------------------
Dated this the 5th day of November, 2009
JUDGMENT
S.R.Bannurmath, C.J.
The appellant/petitioner aggrieved by the order of the
learned Single Judge dated 6th April, 2009 in W.P.(C) No.11275 of
2009, has approached this Court in the present writ appeal.
2. The property belonging to the appellant was alleged
to be sold in favour of the third respondent and thereafter there arose
a dispute between the parties as to the transaction. It is also
contended that the third respondent has executed an agreement for
resale in favour of the appellant also which is the subject matter of
dispute between the parties. Be that as it may, it is not in dispute
that the third respondent has mortgaged the property to the Bank for
the purpose of availing the loan and on committing default recovery
proceedings were initiated by the Bank which was challenged by the
petitioner before this Court in the writ petition.
W.A.No.1818 of 2009
– 2 –
3. The learned Single Judge dismissed the writ petition
on the ground that the petitioner does not have any legal right to
compel the first respondent Bank to receive the amount from him as
against the amounts due from the third respondent on the ground
that there exists no contract between the appellant and the Bank.
4. During the pendency of the writ appeal, initially, on
27.8.2009 the third respondent undertook before this Court to clear
the loan. But as he was not able to do the same, the appellant herein
paid the initial amount of Rupees five lakhs which is acknowledged
by the Bank. Now the appellant has undertaken before us to pay off
the entire balance due to the first respondent Bank within 15 days
from today.
5. In view of the offer made by the appellant to clear the
entire balance, learned counsel for the first respondent Bank states
that so far as the Bank is concerned, if the payment is made it will
have nothing to do further with the property in dispute. Of course,
this clearance of loan by the appellant will be subject to the litigation
pending between the parties which has to be fought by them
W.A.No.1818 of 2009
– 3 –
independently. On such payment, the Bank shall produce the title
deeds in deposit before the civil court where the dispute between the
appellant and third respondent is pending. It is further made clear
that if the appellant fails to clear the entire loan transaction, the Bank
will be at liberty to proceed with the recovery proceedings.
Subject to the above observations, the writ appeal is
disposed of.
S.R.Bannurmath,
Chief Justice
A.K. Basheer,
Judge
vns/vku