IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.SURENDRA MOHAN FRIDAY, THE 11TH JUNE 2010 / 21ST JYAISTHA 1932 WP(C).No. 18143 of 2010(P) -------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ---------------------- EDAVATHKANDI BAVU KUNHABDULLA HAJI, VARAPRATH HOUSE, VELLUR, PERODU P.O., VADAKARA TALUK, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT, PIN 673 504. BY ADV. SRI.K.V.SOHAN SMT.SREEJA SOHAN K. SRI.GEORGE JOSEPH PULIMOOTTIL SMT.MAHALAKSHMI.N SRI. ROVIN RODRIGUES RESPONDENT(S): -------------------------- 1. VADAKARA CO-OPERATIVE AND AGRICULTURAL RURAL DEVELOPMENT BANK, REP.BY ITS SECRETARY, P.O.KAKKATTIL, VADAKARA TALUK, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT. 2. THE SPECIAL SALE OFFICER, VADAKARA CO-OPERATIVE AND AGRICULTURAL RURAL DEVELOPMENT BANK, PO.KAKKATTIL, VADAKARA TALUK, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT. R2 BY SR. GOVT. PLEADER SRI.K.C.SANTHOSHKUMAR THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 11/06/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: tss K.SURENDRA MOHAN, J ........................................... WP(C).NO.18143 OF 2010 ............................................ DATED THIS THE 11TH DAY OF JUNE, 2010 JUDGMENT The petitioner had availed a loan of Rs.97,114/- from the first respondent, Bank in the year 1997. According to the petitioner, he is an Agriculturist, who had availed the loan for the development of his coconut garden, an agricultural purpose. However, he could not repay the loan due to failure of crops and other difficulties. In the year 2007, the Government announced the Agricultural Debt Relief Scheme for ameliorating the difficulties of Agriculturists like the petitioner who were facing financial stringency due to natural calamities. Pursuant to the said Scheme, it is contended that the loans taken by other similarly placed Agriculturists have been written off. The petitioner claims similar reliefs in respect of his loan. 2. The second respondent has issued Ext.P1 notice proposing to sell the property of the petitioner in public auction on 14.6.2010. As per Ext.P1, the second respondent has demanded an amount of Rs.97,114/- towards the principal, a sum of Rs.1,66,059/- towards Wpc 18143/2010 2 interest and a further amount of Rs.6147/- towards penal interest, totalling an amount of Rs.2,69,820/-. Though the petitioner had requested for the benefits of the Agricultural Debt Relief Scheme, he has been directed to deposit an amount of Rs.1,00,000/- before 24.5.2010 as per an endorsement made on the second page of Ext.P1. Since the petitioner is not in a position to raise the said amount of Rs.1,00,000/-, he claims that his debt is liable to be written off in full. In spite of the above legal position, it is submitted by the counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner has remitted an amount of Rs.40,000/- towards the amount demanded in Ext.P1 on 10.6.2010. Therefore, he seeks an appropriate direction for the consideration of his request for the benefits of the Agricultural Debt Relief Scheme. 3. In view of the limited relief that is sought, I do not think it necessary to issue notice to the respondents. Since the petitioner has paid an amount of Rs.40,000/- on 10.6.2010, I feel that he can be given an opportunity to save his property by having his case directed to be considered by the respondents. 4. In the above circumstances, this writ petition is disposed of Wpc 18143/2010 3 directing the first respondent to consider the request of the petitioner for the benefits of the Agricultural Debt Relief Scheme and waiver of the amounts due and payable by him. A decision on his request shall be taken in accordance with law, after hearing the petitioner also, as expeditiously as possible and at any rate, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Pending decision on the request of the petitioner in terms of the above direction, the sale that is proposed to be conducted on 14.6.2010 shall be deferred. K.SURENDRA MOHAN, JUDGE lgk