IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.GIRI WEDNESDAY, THE 24TH JUNE 2009 / 3RD ASHADHA 1931 WP(C).No. 18224 of 2008(T) ------------------------------------ PETITIONERS: -------------------- AGENCY FOR DEVELOPMENT OF ACQUACULTURE KERALA(ADAK), THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, REP. BY THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR. BY ADV. SRI.C.A.JOY SRI.ARUN KRISHNAN RESPONDENTS: ----------------------- 1. NOYAL FEMANDEZ, MANAGING PARTNER, NOJOVI FISHERIES, RESIDING AT NAVEETA HOUSE THUMPA PALLITHURA PO., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 2. KERALA LOK AYUKTA REP. BY ITS REGISTRAR THIRUVANANTHAPURAM R1 BY ADV. SRI.G.S.REGHUNATH SRI.A.M.MUKTHAR THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 24/06/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C) NO. 18224/2008 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS : EXT.P1 COPY OF GO (MS) 39/04/F&PD DATED 28-10-2004. EXT.P2 COPY OF THE GO (MS) 21/2005/F&PD DATED 15-6-2005. EXT.P3 COPY OF THE FIXED DEPOSIT RECEIPT DATED 28-5-2005. EXT.P4 COPY OF THE COMPT.NO.782/2007. EXT.P5 COPY OF THE COUNTER AFFIDAVIT DATED 8-5-2007. EXT.P6 COPY OF THE ORDER OF UPA LOK AYUKTA DT.25-9-2007 IN COMPT.NO.782/2007. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS : EXT.R1(A) COPY OF THE STATEMENT FURNISHED BY THE PETITIONER. EXT.R1(B): COPY OF THE STATEMENT FURNISHED BY THE PETITIONER DT.20-3-2007. / TRUE COPY / PA TO JUDGE. V.GIRI, J. ---------------------------------------- W.P.(C).No.18244 of 2008 ---------------------------------------- Dated this the 24th day of June, 2009. JUDGMENT The 1st respondent herein availed a loan of Rs.5,42,920/- for the purpose of cultivation in a land having an extent of 8 acres in Survey No.142 of Kalliyasheri Village, Kannur. The land had been mortgaged by the petitioner as a security for the repayment of the loan. The loan was to be repaid in instalments with 15% interest over a period of 5 years. The petitioner had extended financial assistance under the Kerala Fisheries Development Project for Prawn Culture (KFDPPC). The project period expired on 31.3.1998. The petitioner took steps to recall the loan given to different Shrimp Farmers. Many of them represented to the Government for waiver of interest. By Ext.P1 Government Order dated 28.10.2004, Government ordered waiver of penal interest upto 30.9.2004 and W.P.(C).No.18244 of 2008 :: 2 :: reduced the interest rate from 15% to 8% per annum. Ext.P1 was again modified by Ext.P2 Government Order dated 15.6.2005 providing for full waiver of interest and penal interest up to 30.9.2004 and simple interest to be levied at 8% with effect from 1.10.2004. 2. It is common case that the 1st respondent had repaid an amount of Rs.1,35,001/- by 5.1.1996. Remaining amounts have not been paid. 3. In the meanwhile, the land belonging to the 1st respondent was acquired for the power project at Kannur. Compensation assessed under the Land Acquisition Act was then deposited in the reference court. It seems that the 1st respondent required the said amount to be remitted. It came about that the compensation amount came to be deposited in the Indian Overseas Bank, Thalassery Branch in the account of the Sub Judge, Thalassery as evidenced by Ext.P3. Thus, an amount of Rs.10,95,854/- is lying in W.P.(C).No.18244 of 2008 :: 3 :: fixed deposit at the Thalassery Branch of the Indian Overseas Bank. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the deposit effected in the bank is in favour of the petitioner and therefore, such deposit of the Land Acquisition Compensation Amount due to the petitioner will have to be treated as one in discharge of the liability which the 1st respondent had incurred with the petitioner. The contention is therefore, that the benefit of Ext.P2 Government Order cannot be extended to the 1st respondent, as it contemplates a waiver of interest and penal interest only in relation to cases where the default in repayment had continued upto the date of Ext.P2 order and not in cases where repayment had already been effected and the loan account closed on the date of Ext.P2. 5. The 1st respondent approached the Lok Ayukta in Complaint No.782/07. Taking note of the W.P.(C).No.18244 of 2008 :: 4 :: fact that Ext.P2 order would otherwise be applicable to the case of the complainant, the Lok Ayukta passed an order directing the compensation amount due to the complainant, lying in Fixed Deposit be returned to the complainant on maturity of the fixed deposit, after retaining the amount due to the petitioner herein in terms of Ext.R1(b) filed by the petitioner herein before the Lok Ayukta showing the calculation of the amount due from the 1st respondent in terms of Ext.P2 Government Order. This order of the Lok Ayukta has been challenged in this writ petition. 6. I heard Mr.C.A.Joy, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.G.S.Reghunath,learned counsel for the 1st respondent. 7. The applicability of Ext.P2 Government Order insofar as it offers waiver of interest and penal interest up to 30.9.2004 as such cannot be disputed by the petitioner, nor is the 1st respondent's eligibility W.P.(C).No.18244 of 2008 :: 5 :: to be covered by Ext.P2 Government Order liable to be disputed. The petitioner's contention seems to be that the benefit of Ext.P2 Government Order cannot be extended to the 1st respondent, because amounts belonging to the 1st respondent by way of Land Acquisition compensation was deposited in the bank, in favour of the petitioner prior to the date of acquisition. In other words, the petitioner contends that there has been, in fact, a repayment of the loan availed by the 1st respondent, prior to the date of Ext.P2 and consequently Ext.P2 would not be applicable to the 1st respondent. I am not inclined to accept this contention. Firstly, the deposit of the land acquisition compensation in the bank as evidenced by Ext.P3, cannot be treated as one made specifically for the purpose of repayment of the loan account held by the 1st respondent with the petitioner. There is nothing in Ext.P3 to show that the amount was deposited under the account of the petitioner. W.P.(C).No.18244 of 2008 :: 6 :: 8. Even otherwise, I am unable to accept the case of the petitioner regarding the applicability of Ext.P2 Government Order to the 1st respondent. When Ext.P2 Government Order directed that there will be complete waiver of interest and penal interest for the period up to 1.10.2004, it will be wholly in-equitable not to apply the benefit of the Government Order to the 1st respondent, who is also otherwise comprehended by the said Government Order, merely because the land acquisition compensation amount came into the hands of the 1st respondent during that period. There is nothing on record to show that the 1st respondent had voluntarily deposited adequate amount with the petitioner with an intention to close the entire loan account, thereby resulting in a severance of the relationship between the petitioner and the 1st respondent on the date of Ext.P2. W.P.(C).No.18244 of 2008 :: 7 :: In these circumstances, I do not find any reason to disagree with the view taken by the Upa Lok Ayukta in this case. I find no grounds to interfere with the impugned order. Writ petition is accordingly dismissed. It is made clear that the petitioner is entitled to the amount shown as due under Ext.R1(d) with interest at the applicable rate on the said amount till today. Sd/- (V.GIRI) JUDGE sk/ //true copy//