IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC WEDNESDAY, THE 1ST DECEMBER 2010 / 10TH AGRAHAYANA 1932 WP(C).No. 28186 of 2010(W) ---------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------- K.C.GEORGE, S/O.CHACKO, ATHITHOTTATHIL HOUSE, KALLIYATTI, EZHAKKARANAD SOUTH P.O., ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN - 682 308. BY ADVS. SRI.PAUL MATHEW (PERUMPILLIL) SRI.P.V.SREENIJIN SMT.K.B.SONY SRI.PRASUN.S SRI.SANU.S.PANICKER SRI.SUNIL CYRIAC RESPONDENT(S): --------------------- 1. THE FEDERAL BANK LTD, ALUVA, ALUVA P.O.,PIN-682 308. REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR. 2. THE REGIONAL MANAGER, FEDERAL BANK LTD, FEDERAL TOWERS, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682 031. ERNAKULAM P.O. 3. THE BRANCH MANAGER, FEDERAL BANK LTD, PUTHENCRUZ BRANCH, PUTHENCRUZ, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682 308.MUVATTUPUZHA. 4. THE AUTHORISED OFFICER/ASSISTANT GENERAL MANAGER, FEDERAL BANK LTD, REGIONAL OFFICE, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682 031.ERNAKULAM P.O. 5. THE RESERVE BANK OF INDIA, MUMBAI-400 008, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF MANAGER,MUMBAI . 6. THE TAHSILDAR, MUVATTUPUZHA – 686 661., ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. MUVATTUPUZHA P.O. .........2/-.. ...2... 7. THE VILLAGE OFFICER, MANEED, PIN - 686 726, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. ERNAKULAM P.O 8. AYYAPPAN, S/O.AYYAPPAN, VETTUKATTIL HOUSE, EZHAKKARANAD P.O., ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN - 682 308. 9. SAVITHRI, W/O.AYYAPPAN, VETTUKATTIL HOUSE, EZHAKKARANAD P.O., ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN - 682 308. R2 & 4 BY ADVS. SRI.A.ANTONY SMT.LEELAMMA ANTONY R9 BY ADV. SRI.M.Y.VARGHESEKUTTY THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 01/12/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: svs/ WP(C).No. 28186/2010 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: P1: COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION ISSUED BY THE 5TH RESPONDENT TO ALL SCHEDULED/COMMERCIAL BANKS INCLUDING THE 1ST RESPONDENT BEARING NO.RBI/2007-2008/330 RPCD.NO.PLFS.BC.72/05.04.02/2007-08 DTD. 23/05/2008 ALONG WITH THE AGRICULTURAL DEBT WAIVER AND DEBT RELIEF SCHEME, 2008. P2: COPY OF THE SALE DEED NO.1733/2001 OF PIRAVOM SRO DATED 18/09/2001. P3: COPY OF THE POSSESSION CERTIFICATE DATED 02/04/2003 ISSUED BY THE 7TH RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER. P4: COPY OF THE EXTRACT OF THE THANDAPPER REGISTER PERTAINING TO THANDAPPER NO.2998 OF MANEED VILLAGE IN THE NAME OF PETITIONER. P5: COPY OF THE EXTRACT OF THE THANDAPPER REGISTER PERTAINING TO THANDAPPER NO.7849 OF MANEED VILLAGE IN THE NAME OF RESPONDENTS 8 AND 9. P6: COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DATED 10/09/2008 ISSUED BY TGE 3RD RESPONDENT TO THE PETITONER. P7: COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DATED 07/12/2009 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER. P8: COPY OF THE LAND TAX RECEIPT BEARING NO.4350973 DATED 17/06/2008 ISSUED BY THE 7TH RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER. P9: COPY OF THE LAND TAX RECEIPT BEARING NO.4166093 DATED 20/10/2009 ISSUED BY THE 7TH RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER. P10: COPY OF THE LAND TAX RECEIPT BEARING NO.4166095 DATED 20/10/2009 ISSUED BY THE 7TH RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER. P11: COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 28/01/2010 SENT BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT. P12: COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION BEARING NO.KGL/ACC/609/2010 DATED 09/02/2010 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER. svs/ ...........2/-... ...2... P13: COPY OF THE NOTICE BEARING NO.EKMR/ARC/KGL/SAR 1117/2010 DATED 05/02/2010 ISSUED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER. P14: COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DATED 12/05/2010 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER. P15: COPY OF THE NOTICE BEARING NO.EKMR/ARC/KGL/SAR 1117/2010 DATED 20/07/2010 ISSUED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS NIL /TRUE COPY/ P.A. TO JUDGE svs ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ``````````````````````````````````````````````````````` W.P.(C) No. 28186 of 2010 W ``````````````````````````````````````````````````````` Dated this the 1st day of December, 2010 J U D G M E N T In this writ petition, the petitioner availed of an agricultural loan of ` 2 lakhs from the respondent Bank on 06- 11-2002. Default was committed and while so, the Government of India announced the Agricultural Debt Waiver and Debt Relief Scheme, 2008. Petitioner applied for the benefit and the Bank offered the benefit of relief of 25% as admissible to 'other farmer'. Petitioner did not comply with the conditions and, therefore, he lost the benefit offered. Subsequently, by Exts.P13 and P15, proceedings under the Securitisation Act have been initiated. It is in this background, the writ petition has been filed. 2. Two contentions are raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner. The first one is that the SARFAESI proceedings are illegal for the reason that the land proceeded against is an agricultural land and exempted from the purview W.P.(C) No.28186/10 : 2 : of the Securitisation Act and in view of Section 31(1) of the Act. Apart from the submissions of the counsel for the Bank, that the land proceeded against is a plot of non agricultural land offered as security, from the pleadings, it is seen that such a contention is not raised by the petitioner. In view of these reasons, I am not persuaded to entertain this plea raised during the course of the arguments. 3. The other contention raised by the counsel for the petitioner is that the petitioner was entitled to be treated as a 'small farmer' as defined in the scheme. This contention is raised on the basis that the petitioner owns only less than 5 acres of land. Learned counsel for the petitioner made reference to Ext.R4(f) possession certificate, indicating that the petitioner held 5.17 acres of land and submitted that prior to the availing of the loan, by Ext.P2 document dated 18-09- 2001, petitioner had already disposed of 31 cents of land. It is stated that therefore at the time when the loan was availed of, the petitioner had ownership over less than 5 acres of land W.P.(C) No.28186/10 : 3 : and that therefore he is a small farmer. According to the counsel despite all this, the Bank illegally classified the petitioner as 'other farmer' and denied his benefit legally due. 4. However, the explanation to clause 3 of the scheme shows that farmers are classified as per the land holding based on the total extent of land owned or based on the total land cultivated, at the time of sanction of the loan. It is stated in Ext.R4(b) that the total extent of land held by the petitioner for cultivation was 6.32 acres of land. In paragraph 2 of the counter affidavit also, it is stated that the petitioner had declared that he intended to cultivate 5.17 acres of land and two plots of 32 cents and 82 cents of land. Therefore, from out of this 6.32 acres of land, even if it is assumed that the petitioner had alienated 31 cents of land by Ext.P1, still at the time of availing of loan, the petitioner possessed at least 6.01 acres of land for cultivation. If that be so, the land available for cultivation with him at the time when he availed of the loan was more than 5 acres and if so, petitioner could W.P.(C) No.28186/10 : 4 : not have been classified as a 'small farmer'. Therefore, this contention also fails. Writ petition fails and it is dismissed. Sd/- (ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE) aks // True Copy // P.A. To Judge