IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC WEDNESDAY, THE 22ND JULY 2009 / 31ST ASHADHA 1931 WP(C).No. 32786 of 2008(C) -------------------------------------- PETITIONERS: --------------------- 1. GIJU GEORGE, UPPOOTUNGAL HOUSE, KADAVOOR. 2. REJU GEORGE, UPPOOTUNGAL HOUSE, KADAVOOR. BY ADV. MR.P.P.JACOB. RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ 1. KADAVOOR SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD. NO.1882, KADAVOOR, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. 2. THE JOINT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES (G), ERNAKULAM. 3. NATIONAL BANK FOR RURAL DEVELOPMENT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORISED OFFICER. R1 BY ADVS. MR.P.J.MATHEW, MR.K.B.ARUNKUMAR, R2 BY GOVT. PLEADER MR. K.S. MOHAMMED HASHIM, R3 BY ADVS. MR.P.B.SURESH KUMAR, MR.LEO GEORGE , MR.K.P.SUJESH KUMAR, MR.K.N.SASIDHARAN NAIR, SMT.SANDHYA RADHAKRISHNAN. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 22/07/2009,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C). NO.32786/2008-C: APPENDIX PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS: EXT.P.1: COPY OF THE LOAN APPLICATION OF P.1. FILED BEFORE THE R.2. DTD. 31/08/2008. EXT.P.2: COPY OF THE UNDERTAKING EXECUTED BY P.1. DTD. 09/10/2002. EXT.P.3: COPY OF THE LOAN ACCOUNT EXTRACT OF P.1. DTD. 09/07/2008. EXT.P.4: COPY OF THE DEBT RELIEF SCHEME ISSUED BY R.3. DTD. 23/05/2008. EXT.P.5: COPY OF THE UNDERTAKING EXECUTED BY P.1. TO R.1. DTD. 29/08/2005. EXT.P.6: COPY OF THE LOAN APPLICATION OF THE P.2. DTD. NIL. EXT.P.7: COPY OF THE REGISTERED LOAN AGREEMENT OF P.2. DTD. 30/09/2002. EXT.P.8: COPY OF THE LOAN ACCOUNT EXTRACT OF P.2. DTD. 09/07/2008. EXT.P.9: COPY OF THE LOAN RENEWAL APPLICATION OF P.2. DTD. 05/08/2005. EXT.P.10: COPY OF THE UNDERTAKING EXECUTED BY P.2. DTD. 29/08/2005. EXT.P.11: COPY OF THE LETTER ISSUED BY R.1. TO THE P.1. DTD. 31/07/08. EXT.P.12: COPY OF THE LETTER ISSUED BY R.1. TO THE P.2. DTD. 31/07/08. EXT.P.13: COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN W.P.(C).29703/08 DTD. 07/10/08. EXT.P.14: COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS ISSUED BY GRIEVANCE REDRESSAL OFFICER OF R.1. DTD. 23/10/2008 TO THE P.1. EXT.P.15: COPY OF THE LETTER ISSUED BY R.1. TO THE P.2. DTD. 23/10/08. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: NIL. //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE. Prv. ANTONY DOMINIC,J. --------------------- W.P.(C).No.32786 OF 2008 ------------------------ Dated this the 22nd day of July, 2009. JUDGMENT Petitioners herein had availed of financial assistance under the Kissan Cash Credit Scheme. Exts.P1 and P6 are the loan applications. Exts.P2 and P7 are the agreements and Exts.P3 and P8 are the account extracts. Exts.P5 and P10 are stated to be the bonds executed by the petitioners at the time of renewing the said loans. 2. According to the petitioners, they are eligible for the benefit of Ext.P4 scheme and they claimed the said benefit. But however, that was declined as per Exts.P11 and P12. These communications were challenged before this court in WP(c).No.29703/08. The said writ Petition was disposed of by Ext.P13 judgment directing the Grievance Redressal Officer to consider the petitioners' claim for relief under Ext.P4 and pass orders. Accordingly, the matter was WP(c).No.32786/08 2 considered and by Exts.P14 and P15, petitioners were informed that they were not defaulters as per Bank's records and therefore are not entitled to waiver of their debts. It is challenging Exts.P14 and P15 that this writ petition has been field. 3. The case of the petitioners is that they were sanctioned loans prior to 31.3.2007 and as on 31.12.2007 their loans were outstanding and therefore, the amount remaining unpaid as on 29.2.2008 is liable to be waived as provided in clause 4.1(b) of Ext.P4. However referring to the documents including Exts.P5 and P10 bonds executed by the petitioners, the learned counsel for the Bank contends that the loans were not outstanding as on 31.12.2007 in terms of Ext.P4 and therefore the petitioners are not entitled to the benefit claimed. This contention is raised on the ground that the loans were renewed in 2005 for a period of 3 years and according to the Bank only on the expiry of 3 years, irrespective the default in payment of interest, can the loans WP(c).No.32786/08 3 be treated as remaining outstanding. It is therefore stated that the petitioners' cases are outside Ext.P4. 4. In my view, this dispute involves resolution of factual issues and is clearly comes under the scope of monetary dispute as contemplated in Section 69 of the Kerala Co- operative Societies Act between the Bank and members and therefore it is for the Petitioners to pursue their remedy under the said provision. Therefore this writ Petition is disposed of, leaving it open to the petitioners to pursue their claims in a proceedings under Section 69 of the Act, in which event, the same shall be considered as expeditiously as possible. (ANTONY DOMINIC) JUDGE vi/ WP(c).No.32786/08 4