IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC THURSDAY, THE 6TH AUGUST 2009 / 15TH SRAVANA 1931 WP(C).No. 22230 of 2009(W) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------ SUBHASH, SON OF PAZHANIMALA, MANGADU, TATTAMANGALAM. BY ADV. SRI.S.EASWARAN SRI.P.MURALEEDHARAN (IRIMPANAM) RESPONDENT(S): ------------------- 1. UNION OF INDIA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, FINANCE DEPARTMENT, CENTRAL SECRETARIAT, NEW DELHI. 2. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, CO-OPERATIVE DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. NABARD, PONNIAM ROAD, P.B.NO.5613, STATUE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695039, REPRESENTED BY ITS GENERAL MANAGER. 4. THE TATTAMANGALAM SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LIMITED NO.P.502 P.O, TATTAMANGALAM 678 102, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. 5. THE GRIEVANCE REDRESSAL OFFICER, TATTAMANGALAM SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD. NO.P.502, P.O.TATTAMANGALAM 678102. 6. THE PALAKKAD DISTRICT CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD., PALAKKAD, REPRESENTED BY ITS GENERAL MANAGER. GOVT.PLEADER SRI.K.C.SANTHOSH KUMAR SRI.P.PARAMESWARAN NAIR, ASG THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 06/08/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ================ W.P.(C) NO. 22230 OF 2009 (W) ===================== Dated this the 6th day of August, 2009 J U D G M E N T Mortgaging 1.28 acres of land, on 26/5/2005, petitioner had availed of a loan of Rs.1.65 lakhs, which is stated to be for agricultural purpose and for starting business in milk vending. It is stated that default was committed and that led the Bank to file ARC 2762/06. Decree was passed and execution proceedings were initiated and the mortgaged property was attached. 2. At that stage, petitioner approached the Bank and got the loan renewed on 16/10/2008. In the meanwhile, Ext.P2 Agricultural Debt Waiver and Debt Relief Scheme, 2008 was introduced and the petitioner complains that his name was not included in the list of beneficiaries. It is stated that as per the scheme, all those loans which was disbursed upto March 31st of 2007 and over due as on 31st of December, 2007 and remaining unpaid till 29th of February, 2008 are eligible for waiver. It is contended that the petitioner is entitled to the benefit of the scheme. 3. In my view, the petitioner is not entitled for the same. WPC 22230/09 :2 : This is for the reason that even if the aforesaid conditions are satisfied, the loan should remain in default. In this case, on 16/10/2008, the loan was renewed and if that be so, the liability has been regularised. If that be so, the petitioner cannot contend that he was a defaulter and claim the benefit of the scheme. For that reason, I am inclined to think that Ext.P4 reply given by the 5th respondent cannot be faulted. Writ petition fails and is dismissed. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE Rp