George Daniel vs The Axis Bank
2021 Latest Caselaw 19639 Ker

          IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                            PRESENT
         THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.B.SURESH KUMAR
  FRIDAY, THE 17TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2021 / 26TH BHADRA,
                             1943
                   WP(C) NO. 17269 OF 2021
PETITIONER:

           GEORGE DANIEL,
           HOUSE NO.51 CHIRAMEL MULAMOOTIL,
           N V NAGAR, PEROORKADA P.O.,
           THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN-695 005.
           BY ADVS.
           V.PREMCHAND
           SURYA MOHAN P.

RESPONDENTS:

    1      THE AXIS BANK,
           RETAIL ASSET CENTRE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM,
           KILLI TOWER, KILLIPALAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM,
           REPRESENTED BY ITS ZONAL MANAGER, PIN-695 002.
    2      BRANCH MANAGER
           AXIS BANK, (LOAN DEPARTMENT), NIHAL COMPLEX,
           KARAMANA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN-695 002.
    3      THE KERALA STATE FINANCIAL ENTERPRISES,
           SASTHAMANGALAM BRANCH, REPRESENTED BY ITS
           BRANCH MANAGER, SASTHAMANGALAM,
           THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN-695 010.
           SRI.P.PAULOCHAN ANTONY
           SRI.SALIL NARAYANAN K.A., SC, KSFE LTD.


        THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR
ADMISSION ON 17.09.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 W.P.(C) No.17269 of 2021              ..2..




                    W.P.(C)No.17269 of 2021
          -------------------------------------------------------


                           JUDGMENT

Petitioner has availed a loan from the first respondent

bank on the strength of a mortgage created in respect of an item

of property owned by him. The petitioner was a subscriber in a

chit run by the Kerala State Financial Entreprices (KSFE). The said

chit is now prized and the prize money is sufficient to liquidate

the outstanding liability in the account of the loan availed by the

petitioner from the first respondent bank. Since the petitioner

does not have any security to offer for receiving the prize money

of the chit prized in his favour other than the property mortgaged

to the first respondent bank, he approached the KSFE with a

request to transfer the prize money of the chit to the first

respondent bank and receive from them the title deeds of the

property mortgaged. On the said request, the third respondent W.P.(C) No.17269 of 2021 ..3..

issued Ext.P5 communication to the first respondent bank for the

said purpose. The writ petition is filed thereafter alleging that the

first respondent bank is not acting upon Ext.P5 communication.

2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and

the respective Standing Counsel for respondents 1 and 3.

3. Ext.P5 communication addressed by the third

respondent to the first respondent reads thus:

"Vide reference cited, Mr.George Daniel and his wife Smt.Mariamma CV have requested that the landed property with building under mortgage to the above loan to be taken over as security by transferring the prize money of chitty 42/2019-33 to your loan account. Hence it is informed that we are willing to transfer the amount due to close the said loan subject to the following:

1. You may please intimate us the actual amount as on date for closing the said loan.

2. Please issue attested copies of title deeds and revenue records.

3. Please issue a letter to the effect that as and when you got amount from KSFE, the original property document to be handed over to KSFE in the presence of the loanee.

Smt.Mariamma CV and her husband are loyal customers W.P.(C) No.17269 of 2021 ..4..

of our branch and have long standing relationship with us. As part of customer service and considering this pandamic scenario, you may please co-operate with us for closing your loan amount."

4. Today, when this matter was taken up, the

learned counsel for the parties on either side agreed that the

first respondent bank has already intimated the KSFE the

amounts due for closing the loan and has also forwarded to the

KSFE the attested copies of the title deeds and revenue

records of the property mortgaged by the petitioner. On being

asked as to the reason for not giving a letter to the third

respondent to the effect that the title deeds of the property

would be handed over to KSFE as and when the amount is

disbursed by them to the first respondent bank, the learned

Standing Counsel for the first respondent submitted that they

are prepared to give such a letter if the petitioner gives a letter

to them intimating that he has no objection in the first

respondent bank giving such a letter to the KSFE.

 W.P.(C) No.17269 of 2021             ..5..




            5.    The      learned   counsel   for   the   petitioner

submitted that the petitioner would give the letter required by

the first respondent bank forthwith.

In the circumstances, the writ petition is closed,

recording the submissions made by the learned counsel for the

parties as aforesaid.

Sd/-

                                     P.B.SURESH KUMAR, JUDGE
rkj
 W.P.(C) No.17269 of 2021         ..6..




                  APPENDIX OF WP(C) 17269/2021

PETITIONER EXHIBITS
Exhibit P1             TRUE COPY OF THE REVERSE MORTGAGE LOAN
                       SANCTION LETTER DATED 28.11.2011 BY
                       THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
Exhibit P2             TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED
                       9.4.2021 IN WPC NO.9485/2021 BEFORE
                       THIS HON'BLE COURT.
Exhibit P3             TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DATED
                       10.8.2021 ISSUED BY THE IST
                       RESPONDENT.
Exhibit P4             TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DATED
                       17.8.2021 ADDRESSED TO THE 2ND
                       RESPONDENT.
Exhibit P5             TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DATED

18.8.2021 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT.

Exhibit P6 TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DATED 17.8.2021 TO 2ND RESPONDENT.