JUDGMENT

The above writ petition is filed with following prayers:

“(i) issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, direction or order to the 1st respondent bank to release the original documents of the mortgaged property after accepting balance amount as per the settlement entered between the petitioners and the 1st respondent bank.

(ii) issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, direction or order commanding the 1st respondent to abstain from pursuing any coercive proceedings as against the properties owned by the petitioners by virtue of Exhibit P1and Exhibit P2 in respect of realization of any liability in the name of

2nd and 3rd respondents.

(iii) issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, direction or order commanding the 1st respondent to release the property from all charges, if at all there be on, on reasonable terms considering the facts and circumstances of the case.

(iv) issue such other further reliefs as are necessary in the interests of justice.”

2. The petitioners are the owners of certain items of property. The property originally belongs to late Venugopal, who is the father of the petitioners. The petitioners executed a sale deed as a security for a financial assistance of an amount of Rs.5 lakhs from the 2nd and 3rd respondents. It is the case of the petitioners that the 2nd and 3rd respondents mortgaged the property to the 1st respondent bank for getting a big loan amount. It is further stated by the petitioners that the petitioners cleared the liability with the 2nd and 3rd respondents in the bank. The 2nd and 3rd respondents reconveyed the property to the petitioners. Thereafter, the petitioners approached the respondent bank for getting back their original title deed of the property. It is the case of the petitioners that the bank was ready to return the document on payment of the amount due to the bank. The petitioners paid the entire amount due from the 2nd respondent to the 1st respondent bank. Even then the bank is not releasing the original title deed to the petitioners because the documents were originally submitted by the 2nd and 3rd respondents. Hence, this writ petition is filed.

3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel for the 1st respondent. I also heard the learned counsel for 2nd and 3rd respondents.

4. The learned counsel for the 2nd and 3rd respondents submitted that respondents 2 and 3 have no objection in releasing the documents to the petitioners on condition that the petitioners will clear the entire dues to the 1st respondent bank. On the other hand, the petitioners and the 1st respondent submitted that the amount is already cleared. In such circumstances, I think there can be a direction to the 1st respondent to release the title deed to the petitioners.

Therefore, this writ petition is allowed in the following manner:

1. The 1st respondent bank is directed to release the deposited title deed to the petitioners forthwith, at any rate, within one week from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

2. No cost.