2004 (7) TMI 375

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Corporation. A.P. Jittu for the State. JUDGMENT 1. In this writ petition, grievance of the petitioner is on account of non-redeeming of mortgage and return of the title documents filed by them. 2. According to learned counsel for the petitioner, the letter of the branch manager dated December 6, 1983, contained in Annexure 7/B itself would show that the entire loan amount was paid by the....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....he petitioner deposited Rs. 50,000. Thus, after adjustment of the said Rs. 50,000, a sum of Rs. 29,888.03 still remained to be paid by the petitioner as on September 22, 1983. However, under misconception created by Annexure 7/B, the petitioner could not deposit the said amount. 4. However, Mr. Shashi, learned counsel for the Corporation, has submitted that the petitioner will be liable to pay ....