IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C).No. 7828 of 2009(W)
1. L.GEETHA KUMARI,KOCHUVEETTIL, VAZHICHAL,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. KERALA STATE FINANCIAL ENTERPRISES LTD.,
... Respondent
2. BRANCH MANAGER, KERALA STATE
3. SPECIAL DEPUTY TAHSILDAR (R.R)
For Petitioner :SRI.S.MOHAMMED AL RAFI
For Respondent :SRI.M.K.CHANDRAMOHAN DAS, SC, KSFE, LTD
The Hon'ble MR. Justice ANTONY DOMINIC
Dated :02/04/2009
O R D E R
ANTONY DOMINIC,J.
---------------------
W.P.(C).No.7828 OF 2009
------------------------
Dated this the 2nd day of April, 2009.
JUDGMENT
Petitioner submits that he has availed of a business
loan of Rs.1 lakh from the 2nd respondent and also a chitty
loan of Rs.50,000/-. According to the petitioner both
these loans were secured by mortgaging his properties
comprised in R.S.No.41/2-1 and 41/2-2 of
Ottashekharamangalam Village having an extent of 40
cents. It is stated that the petitioner had settled the
liabilities under both these loans and requested for
releasing the mortgaged property. But however the
respondents have not released the same. Reasons
according to the petitioner is that he has availed of other
loans as well.
However, the petitioner submits that the aforesaid
properties cannot be made liable for the other loans for
the reason that for all those loans separate properties have
WP(c).No.7828/09 2
been given as security, apart from individual sureties. It is
stated that since those loans are fully secured by the
properties given as securities and the sureties offered, the
property referred to above should be released. Counsel also
placed reliance on the judgment rendered by this court in D.
Vijayalakshmi V. The Kerala State Financial Enterprises(ILR
2005(2)Kerala 257).
If as stated by the petitioner, the remaining outstanding
loans are fully secured, prima facie I do not find any reason for
not releasing the properties. In any case, now that the
petitioner has raised this issue before the 2nd respondent by
filing Ext.P4 representation, I direct the 2nd respondent to
consider Ext.P4 and pass orders thereon, in the light of the
above observations and the judgment referred to above.
Orders shall be passed on Ext.P4 as expeditiously as
possible and at any rate within 2 weeks from the date of
production of a copy of the judgment along with a copy of this
writ petition.
WP(c).No.7828/09 3
Writ petition is disposed of as above.
(ANTONY DOMINIC)
JUDGE
vi/
WP(c).No.7828/09 4