1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.4975 of 2009 Bapuso Bharmappa Chougule .... Petitioner V/s. Mahavir Vividh Karyakari Seva (V.K.S.) Society Ltd. And Ors. ..... Respondents Mr.Amit B. Borkar, for the petitioner. Mr.A.M.Savagave, for respondent No.1. Mr.S.S.Patwardhan ,for respondent No.2. Mrs.S.S.Bhende, AGP, for the respondent NO.3. State. CORAM :P.B.MAJMUDAR & R.G.KETKAR, JJ. DATE : 23TH APRIL, 2010 P.C. 1. By way of this petition, petitioner has prayed that the impugned order passed by respondent No.2 i.e. Grievance Redressal Officer, Kolahapur District Central Co-op. Bank Ltd., 27-08-2008 may be quashed and set aside. By the impugned order, it is held by respondent No.2 that the petitioner is not entitled to the benefit of the scheme, which provides exemption from payment of agricultural debt. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is a agriculturalist and for the purpose of agriculture, he has taken a loan and therefore, benefit of scheme should be made available to him and as per the Scheme, petitioner can be said to be exempted from 2 payment of debt. 3. The petition is resisted by the respondents. Affidavit-in- reply has been filed on behalf of respondent No.2, wherein it is clearly mentioned that petitioner claims debt waiver in respect of cash credit sugarcane crop loan. It is further stated that petitioner applied for loan and was granted the same for the period between 01-10-2005 to 30-09-2006. For the aforesaid period, petitioner obtained loan of Rs. 53,306/- towards the sugarcane crop. As per the policy, repayment of this loan was expected by the end of June, 2007. As on 01-07-2007, a sum of Rs.31,796/- was remained to be unpaid and therefore, the same is classified as over due amount. It is further stated in the affidavit that the petitioner has repaid the principal amount along with accrued interest thereon, on 27-09-2009. Loan account statement is also annexed with the affidavit-in-reply. It is the say of respondent No.2 that entire loan amount is repaid by the petitioner. 4. It is also stated in the affidavit that petitioner thereafter, applied for and obtained loan of Rs.46,661/- for sugarcane crop for the year 2006-07. The said loan was required to be repaid by the petitioner from 01-1-2007 to 30-06-2008 and the entire amount has been paid by the petitioner with interest accrued thereon. It is further stated in the affidavit that the loan obtained by the petitioner in the year 2006-07, never became 3 overdue. Statement of account is also annexed in this behalf at Exh.F to the affidavit-in-reply. It is the say of respondent No.2 that the loan thus did not remain overdue as on 31-12-2007 and also did not remain unpaid till 29-02-2008. As per the said affidavit, benefit of debt waiver scheme was rightly denied to the petitioner. 5. The learned counsel for respondent No.1 Society, pointed out that respondent No.2 has filed affidavit as per their say and as per the Society’s record, petitioner has paid the amount. In our view, once the petitioner has paid the entire amount, he cannot claim benefit under the debt waiver scheme. We accordingly do not find any substance in the petition and it is therefore, rejected. ( R.G.KETKAR, J. ) ( P.B.MAJMUDAR, J. )