1 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 14.09.2011 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.SUDHAKAR W.P.(MD)No.3701 of 2011 S.K.Sankaran Chettiar ... Petitioner Vs. 1. The Branch Manager, Indian Overseas Bank, Karambakudi Branch, Karambakudi-622 302, Pudukkottai District. 2. The Chief Regional Manager, Indian Overseas Bank, 26/7, College Road, Karaikudi-630 002. 3. K.Anbarasan 4. G.Palanivel 5. P.Appadurai 6. The Branch Manager, Indian Bank, Karambakudi Branch, Pudukkottai District. 7. The Branch Manager, State Bank of India, Thiruvonam, Orathanadu Taluk, Thanjavur District. ... Respondents PRAYER: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a writ of Certiorarified mandamus calling for the records relating to the first respondent letter dated 19.11.2010 relating to AJL No.326/07 dated 05.02.2007 and quash the same as arbitrary, illegal and consequently directing the first respondent to waive the loan amount of Rs.36,000/- availed by the petitioner from the first respondent bank in AJL No.326/07 on 05.02.2007 as per the Government guidelines in Circular No.ADV/175/2008-2009 dated 26.05.2008 and No.ADV/178/2008-2009 dated 31.05.2008 and return back the jewels pledged by the petitioner. For Petitioner ... Mr.K.Baalasundharam For Respondent ... Mr.Pala.Ramasamy for R.1 and R.2 ... Mr.M.Vallinayagam for R.7 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2 ORDER This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner to issue a writ of Certiorarified mandamus calling for the records relating to the first respondent letter dated 19.11.2010 relating to AJL No.326/07 dated 05.02.2007 and quash the same as arbitrary, illegal and consequently directing the first respondent to waive the loan amount of Rs.36,000/- availed by the petitioner from the first respondent bank in AJL No.326/07 on 05.02.2007 as per the Government guidelines in Circular No.ADV/175/2008-2009 dated 26.05.2008 and No.ADV/178/2008-2009 dated 31.05.2008 and return back the jewels pledged by the petitioner. 2. Heard Mr.K.Baalasundharam, learned Counsel for the petitioner, Mr.Pala.Ramasamy, learned Counsel appearing for the respondents 1 and 2 and Mr.M.Vallinayagam, learned Counsle appearing for the seventh respondent. 3. By consent, the writ petition itself is taken up for final disposal. 4. The petitioner an agriculturist applied for jewel loan for a sum of Rs.36,000/- to meet the agriculture expenses. The said loan was granted by M/s Indian Overseas Bank on 05.02.2007. As per the agreement, the loan falls due as on 05.02.2008. The petitioner could not repay the loan, due to failure of crop. Therefore, he sought for waiver of agriculture loan under Agricultural Debt Waiver and Debt Relief Scheme 2008. 5. The respondents declined to grant the waiver on the ground that for considering the said claim, the loan should fall due on 31.12.2007. Since as per the agreement, the relevant date when the loan becomes due is 05.02.2008, the petitioner is not entitled to the same. 6. It is not in dispute that the agriculture/jewel loan in this case was given to raise the sugar cane crop and the period of crop is ten months and the crop failed. In similar cases, the sixth and seventh respondent Banks have considered the period of crop and granted waiver on the ground that the borrower could not repay the amount, due to failure of crop by treating it as over due, even though the relevant date is 31.12.2007. In effect if there was reason to believe that the crop had failed and the borrower cannot pay it is a case of over due due to crop failure. 7. In this case, if it is accepted that the crop had failed, even prior to the cut off date, the petitioner's claim that it should be treated as over due is justified, as even before the relevant date, the petitioner should be treated as the borrower unable to pay the crop loan due to crop failure. The agreement fixing one year period for payment is an outer limit. The petitioner in this case has proved that the crop has failed and unable to pay the loan amount within the relevant cut off date. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 3 Therefore, the authority is entitled to consider the claim of the petitioner in terms of Agricultural Debt Waiver and Debt Relief Scheme 2008 treating it as over due. The petitioner is willing to establish his claim for waiver on account of crop failure and he is entitled to seek waiver as on the date of failure, when the debt becomes over due in view of his inability to pay. 8. The case of the respondents 6 and 7 Banks appear to have treated similar claims and grant waiver. The first and second respondents are directed to consider the petitioner's claim for waiver in terms of Agricultural Debt Waiver and Debt Relief Scheme 2008 without discrimination considering the relief granted by the respondents 6 and 7 in similar cases. 9. The writ petition is ordered as above. No costs. Sd/- Assistant Registrar /True Copy/ Sub Assistant Registrar To: 1. The Branch Manager, Indian Overseas Bank, Karambakudi Branch, Karambakudi-622 302, Pudukkottai District. 2. The Chief Regional Manager, Indian Overseas Bank, 26/7, College Road, Karaikudi-630 002. 3. The Branch Manager, State Bank of India, Thiruvonam, Orathanadu Taluk, Thanjavur District. +1cc to Mr.M.Vallinayagam, Advocate, Sr.No. 31513 ssl ssk/04.10.2011 /5c -3p/- W.P.(MD)No.3701 of 2011 14.09.2011 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/