Anu P Vijay vs Kerala Gramin Bank
2021 Latest Caselaw 21991 Ker

            IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                PRESENT
        THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN
WEDNESDAY, THE 3RD DAY OF NOVEMBER 2021 / 12TH KARTHIKA, 1943
                      WP(C) NO. 17043 OF 2021
PETITIONER:

            ANU P VIJAY
            AGED 38 YEARS
            D/O VIJAYAKUMAR, PRANAVAM,
            KANAKAPPALAM.P.O, ERUMELY VILLAGE, KANJIRAPILLY,
            KOTTAYAM.
            NOW RESIDING AT 14/136(201) LAKSHMI NIVAS, CM
            YADAV BUILDING, OLD MIRJALAGUDA,
            MALKAJIGIRI, SECUNDERABAD-500047.
            BY ADVS.
            BASIL CHANDY VAVACHAN
            GEORGIE SIMON
            SURYA SUNDARESAN
            NIRMAL J.KALLELY
            CHARUTHA BHAIJU

RESPONDENTS:

    1       KERALA GRAMIN BANK
            REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGER,
            AVITANELLUR, KOOTTALIDA.P.O,
            KOZHIKODE-673614.
    2       THE CHAIRMAN,
            KERALA GRAMIN BANK HEAD OFFICE, KGB TOWERS,
            A.K.ROAD, UP HILL, MALAPPURAM,
            KERALA-676505.
    3       MANOJAN.E.K,
            AGED 50 YEARS
            S/O CHATHUKUTTY, ELLUKANDY HOUSE, AVITENELLUR.P.O,
            KOYILANDY TALUK,
            KOZHIKODE,KERALA-673614.
            BY ADV RAJESH NAMBIAR


     THIS     WRIT   PETITION    (CIVIL)     HAVING    COME    UP    FOR
ADMISSION     ON   03.11.2021,    THE     COURT   ON   THE    SAME   DAY
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 W.P.(C).No.17043/2021

                                         2


                     P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J.
                      --------------------------------
                     W.P.(C).No.17043 of 2021
               ----------------------------------------------
            Dated this the 03rd day of November, 2021


                                   JUDGMENT

This writ petition is filed with following prayers:

i. Issue a writ of mandamus or such other appropriate writ, order or direction, directing the respondent No.1 to permit the petitioner to pay the entire outstanding amount in the loan taken by respondent No.3 from respondent No.1 against the property which is now owned by the petitioner.

ii. Issue a writ of mandamus or such other appropriate writ, order or direction, directing the respondent No.1 to return all the documents of the petitioner's property to the petitioner after the settlement of aforesaid loan.

iii. Issue such other writ, order or direction as this Hon'ble court deem fit to the facts and circumstances of the case.

2. The petitioner is seeking a direction to the 1 st

respondent to allow her to settle the loan availed by her ex-

husband (respondent No.3) from the 1 st respondent Bank

pledging the property owned by the petitioner and to get back W.P.(C).No.17043/2021

the documents mortgaged in connection with the loan. The

petitioner was the wife of the 3 rd respondent. The 3rd

respondent availed a loan of Rs.1 lakh from the 1 st respondent

Bank in the year 2012 by mortgaging 2 Acre and 57 cents of

immovable property comprised in Re-Survey No.28/1 of

Kayyanna Village, Koyilandi Taluk, Kozhikode. Thereafter the

3rd respondent transferred the said property to the petitioner

as per Ext.P1 registered document. Subsequently the 3 rd

respondent made default in repaying the loan and the loan

account became a Non-Performing Account. The 1 st

respondent Bank started recovery proceedings. The petitioner

requested the 1st respondent Bank to permit her to clear off

the loan and to get back the document mortgaged. But the 1 st

respondent Bank is not allowing the same. Hence this writ

petition.

3. Heard the counsel for the petitioner and the

Standing Counsel for respondents 1 and 2. Even though

notice was issued to the 3 rd respondent, the 3rd respondent

refused the notice. Hence this Court declared that the service

of notice on the 3rd respondent is complete.

4. It is the specific case of the petitioner that the W.P.(C).No.17043/2021

property which is mortgaged to the 1st respondent Bank is

subsequently transferred to the petitioner as per Ext.P1

registered gift deed. According to the petitioner, she is ready

to clear the entire loan arrears of the 3 rd respondent in the 1st

respondent Bank and there may be a direction to the 1 st

respondent Bank to return the mortgaged document. Since

there is no appearance for the 3rd respondent and the 3rd

respondent even refused the notice issued by this Court, I am

of the view that there can be a direction to the 1 st respondent

to return the mortgaged document once the petitioner clear

the entire amount due to the Bank.

Therefore, this writ petition is disposed in the following

manner:

1. The petitioner is free to approach the 1 st

respondent Bank and can clear the entire dues

of the loan account which was availed by the

3rd respondent, within three weeks from the

date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

2. Once the entire amount is cleared by the

petitioner, the 1st respondent Bank will return

the document pledged by the 3 rd respondent to W.P.(C).No.17043/2021

the petitioner, within one week from the date

on which the amount due to the Bank is

cleared by the petitioner.

Sd/-

                                      P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN
JV                                           JUDGE
 W.P.(C).No.17043/2021





                APPENDIX OF WP(C) 17043/2021

PETITIONER EXHIBITS
Exhibit P1        THE TRUE COPY OF REGISTERED DOCUMENT

NO.P1/2013/I/249/2014 DATED 18-12-2013 REGISTERED BEFORE THE KOORACHUND SUB REGISTRAR OFFICE, KOZHIKODE.

Exhibit P2 THE TRUE COPY OF COMMON JUDGMENT DATED 20-4-2016 IN OP NO.348/2014, OP 349/2014 AND M.C 81/2014 OF HONOURABLE FAMILY COURT ,PALA Exhibit P3 THE TRUE COPY OF REQUEST LETTER DATED 8-3-2021 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT BANK.

Exhibit P4 THE TRUE COPY OF THE REQUEST LETTER DATED 3-8-2021 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT.