The petitioner who availed an agricultural loan for Rs.25,000/-from the 4th respondent Co-operative Bank on the strength of Ext.P1 Gahan No.2836/1995 of the Sub Registrar Office, Adoor dated 18.8.1995 creating mortgage over his property having an extent of 15.6 areas (37 cents) in re-survey No.435/9 of Peringanad Village has approached this Court in this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking a writ of certiorari to quash Ext.P6 award of the 2nd respondent Arbitrator dated 25.03.2015 in A.R.C.No.434/2012, Ext.P8 judgment of the Co-operative Tribunal dated 31.07.2015 in Appeal No.54/2015 and Ext.P9 demand notice of the 3rd respondent Special Sale Officer dated 24.07.2017. The petitioner has also sought for a declaration that the liability incurred by him towards the 4th respondent Co-operative Bank, pursuant to Ext.P2 loan application dated 09.01.2003, is not liable to be recovered, being time barred and a writ of mandamus commanding the 3rd respondent Special Sale Officer to forbear from any recovery steps against the petitioner pursuant to Exts.P6, P8 and P9.

2. On 28.07.2017, when this writ petition came up for admission, this Court issued urgent notice by speed post to respondents 2 to 4. The learned Government Pleader took notice for the 1st respondent.

3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Government Pleader appearing for respondents 1 to 3 and also the learned counsel for the 4th respondent Co-operative Bank.

4. The sole contention raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner is that, the liability incurred by the petitioner towards the 4th respondent Co-operative Bank, pursuant to Ext.P2 loan application dated 09.01.2003, was time barred as on the date of filing of Ext.P4 claim in A.R.C.No.434/2012 before the 2nd respondent Arbitrator under Section 69 of the Kerala Cooperative Societies Act, 1969 and as such, Ext.P6 award of the Arbitrator, Ext.P8 judgment of the Co-operative Tribunal and Ext.P9 demand notice of the 3rd respondent Special Sale Officer are liable to be set aside.

5. On 18.08.1995, the petitioner availed an agricultural loan for Rs.25,000/-from the 4th respondent Co-operative Bank after executing Ext.P1 Gahan No.2836/1995 of the Sub Registrar Office, Adoor dated 18.8.1995, creating mortgage over his property having an extent of 15.6 areas (37 cents) in re-survey No.435/9 of Peringanad Village. Clauses 1 to 7 of Ext.P1 Gehan would show that it is a continuing guarantee for availing loans, on executing venkadapathrams from time to time, up to a total sum of Rs.25,000/-, and Ext.P1 Gehan shall continue to be in force till the petitioner repays the entire amount due to the 4th respondent Co-operative Society, under such venkadapathrams executed from time to time. After repaying the agricultural loan availed on 18.08.1995, the petitioner availed another loan for Rs.25,000/-from the 4th respondent Co-operative Bank, on 09.01.2003, based on Ext.P2 loan application dated 09.01.2003, after executing Ext.P3 venkadapathram dated 09.01.2003, agreeing to repay the loan amount together with 15% interest over a period of two years. Ext.P2 loan application would show that, the petitioner was sanctioned with the second loan for Rs.25,000/-on the strength of the continuing security offered in Ext.P1 Gahan.

6. As the petitioner did not repay the agricultural loan availed on 09.01.2003, the 4th respondent Co-operative Bank filed A.R.C.No.434/2012 before the 1st respondent Assistant Registrar of Co-operative Societies, which was made over to the 2nd respondent Arbitrator for disposal. Ext.P4 is the claim dated 15.05.2012 in A.R.C.No.434/2012 for recovery of a total sum of Rs.70,284/-. On receipt of notice in A.R.C.No.434/2012, the petitioner filed Ext.P5 objection dated 14.3.2013, essentially contending that the claim is time barred, either based on Ext.P1 Gahan or Ext.P3 venkadapathram. According to the petitioner, the loan amount would become time barred after t