IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN THURSDAY, THE 16TH OCTOBER 2008 / 24TH ASWINA 1930 WP(C).No. 29816 of 2008(Y) --------------------------------------- O.A. NO.33/2003 OF DEBT RECOVERY TRIBUNAL, ERNAKULAM. .................... PETITIONER: ------------------- LEELAMMA ABRAHAM, 66 YEARS, W/O.LATE ABRAHAM, PANNIKKOTTE ALUMKAL HOUSE. MEMALA, VENNIKULAM P.O., PATHANAMTHITTA. BY ADV. SRI.C.A.JOSEPH, ADV. SRI.K.K.MOIDEEN. RESPONDENTS: ----------------------- 1. FEDERAL BANK LTD., REGD.OFFICE ALUVA, PURAMATTAM BRANCH, PATHANAMTHITTA, KERALA. 2. A.ABRAHAM, S/O.LATE K.A. ABRAHAM, PANNIKKOTTU ALUMKAL HOUSE, MEMALA, VENNIKKULAM PO., PATHANAMTHITTA. 3. LIGI ABRAHAM, S/O.LATE ABRAHAM, PANNIKKOTT ALUMKAL HOUSE, MEMALA, VENNIKKULAM P.O., PATHANAMTHITTA. 4. MAYJI ABRAHAM, S/O.LATE K.A.ABRAHAM, PANNIKKOTTE ALUMKAL HOUSE, MEMALA., VENNIKKULAM PO., PATHANAMTHITTA. ADV. SRI. GEORGE, S.C FOR R1. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 16/10/2008,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: prv. THOTTATHIL B. RADHAKRISHNAN, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = W.P.(C).No.29816 of 2008-Y = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 16th day of October, 2008. JUDGMENT The petitioner has a dairy farm. She had availed a mortgage loan. She also availed a loan for the purpose of dairy farm. It appears that her dairy farm used to produce large quantities of milk. I say so because, the petitioner, going by the records of the High Court, had filed WP(C). 26318/2003 seeking a direction to a primary milk co-operative society to collect the entire milk produced in her dairy farm because the society does not receive more than 100 litres. The case in hand is a claim by the petitioner that she is entitled to the benefit of the debt relief scheme brought in by the Central Government to support the agricultural sector. Even according to the learned counsel for the WP(C)29816/08 -: 2 :- bank, one loan is availed for dairy farm, though the other is a mortgage loan. On the totality of the facts and circumstances, I deem it appropriate that the first respondent considers Ext.P5. However, that will be on condition that the petitioner deposits an amount of Rs.2 lakhs within three weeks from now. It is further directed that the Debt Relief Commission will adjourn any interim application filed by the writ petitioner to set aside ex parte order passed against her in O.A.33/2003, awaiting the decision of the bank on Ext.P5. All other contentions are left open. The writ petition is ordered accordingly. THOTTATHIL B. RADHAKRISHNAN, JUDGE. Sha/161008