JUDGMENT

First respondent appears through counsel. Respondents 2 and 3, learned counsel for petitioner submits are ex parte in the trial court. Moreover, having regard to the decision I propose to take in this proceeding, notice to respondents 2 and 3 is not necessary and hence is dispensed with.

2. Petitioner is the third defendant in O.S.No.335 of

2010 of the Court of learned First Additional Sub Judge, Ernakulam. That is a suit filed by the first respondent for recovery of money against respondents 2 and 3 on the strength of a loan agreement. According to the petitioner the loan is secured by equitable mortgage of property of the second respondent which is specifically mentioned in the application for loan itself. Petitioner has a contention that in spite of there being an equitable mortgage the first respondent has not proceeded against the mortgaged property, the right of petitioner as against the principal debtor is thereby lost and at any rate on account of the conduct of first respondent, his liability is discharged under Secs.139 and 141 of the Indian Contract Act . Petitioner filed I.A.No.4194 of 2011 to direct the first respondent to produce title deed relating to the prop