KERALA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION VAZHUTHACAD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM APPEAL 528/2009 JUDGMENT DATED: 30.6.2010 PRESENT JUSTICE SRI.K.R.UDAYABHANU : PRESIDENT 1. Manager, Vijaya Bank, : APPELLANTS Meppady, Wayanad. 2. Deputy General Manager, Vijaya Bank, Regionla Office, Kochi. (By Adv.G.S.Kalkura) Vs. Mary Joseph, w/o Joseph, Thalanilkumthadathil House, NAthankuni(P.O), Wayanadu district, Represented by the Power of Attorney Holder Jiji Joseph, S/o K.S.Joseph, Mylampara.P.O., Puthupady, Thamarassery, Kozhikode. JUDGMENT JUSTICE SRI.K.R.UDAYABHANU : PRESIDENT The appellant is the opposite party in CC.106/2008 in the file of CDRF, Wayanad. The appellant is under orders to waive off the entire outstanding loan amount and to return the title deed and to pay Rs.500/- towards cost. 2. The case of the complainant is that she is entitled to the benefits of the Agricultural Debt Waiver and Debt Relief Scheme of 2008 of the Government of India and that she applied for the same. The opposite parties declined the relief on the contention that the complainant and her daughter is in possession of more than 5 acres of property. The opposite parties incorrectly treated the property owned by her son also as the property in her possession and declined to extent the relief. She has applied before the Deputy General Manager of the opposite party Bank also. She has sought for getting the waiver of the amount of Rs.1,43,851/- outstanding and also sought for compensation of Rs.20000/- for the mental agony and hardships, and return of title deeds which are with the opposite parties since 1997. 3. In the version filed by the opposite parties it was contended that the complainant was not entitled to get the relief as she is having in her possession the property of extending 2 hectares. 4. Opposite parties filed another additional version subsequently on 24.2.09 admitting that the complainant is entitled for the reliefs provided. It is mentioned that the complainant is entitled only for a maximum amount of Rs.1,00,000/- plus interest. The loan balance outstanding as on 29.2.2008 was Rs.1,43,,851/-. So she is eligible proportionately for only Rs.99,208/- and the same has been credited on 24.12.08. The unapplied interest of Rs.14000/- will be adjusted at the time of closing the loan. 5. The evidence adduced consisted of the testimony of PWs 1 and , OPW1; Exts.A1 to A7 series, B1 and B2 series and X1 series. 6. In view of the fact that the appellants had admitted the eligibility of the complainant, the discussions in the judgment of the Forum as to entitlement of the complainant for the benefits is not be considered. Forum has held that the complainant is entitled for getting the entire debt waived as per the scheme. 7. The appellants has produced Ext.B2 series the clarifications issued by the Ministry of Finance, Government of India. The scheme propounded in the budget for 2008 and 2009 has not been produced as such by either side. But the clarifications of the Ministry of Finance vide para 13 would show that doubts as to the interpretations is to be referred to the Central Government and the decision of the Central Government shall be final. In B2 series contained clarifications issued by the Ministry of Finance. As pointed out by the counsel for the appellants the Ministry of Finance of Central government have clarified that over due amount qualifies for debt waiver subject to the condition that the amount is limited to Rs.1,00,000/- and that the waiver will not apply to any amount in excess to Rs.1,00,000/-. It is also mentioned that in the case of NPA loans no interest will be applied from the date when the loan account was classified as NPA. The counsel has contended that applying the eligible amount Rs.1,00,000/- proportionately to the outstanding amount of Rs.1,43,851/- the eligible amount would be Rs.99,208/-. No such proportional reduction as such is mentioned in the clarifications by the Ministry of Finance. It is stated that the loan of the complainant was made NPA on 5.11.06. It is also pointed out that unapplied interest from 5.11.2006 would work out to Rs.14000/-. According to the appellants the above will be adjusted when the loan amount is closed . It is also pointed out that after deducting/adjusting Rs.99208/- the balance is Rs.46527/- and that the complainant would be liable for interest at 7% per annum on the above amount and that from the above amount inclusive of interest at the time of settling the loan the amount of Rs.14,000/- ie, unapplied interest will be waived. We find that the above particulars of the instructions from the Ministry of Finance has not produced . In the circumstances we find that the complainant is entitled for waiver of Rs.1,00,000/- out of the outstanding amount of Rs.1,43,851/-. Evidently the opposite parties/appellants had raised untenable contentions and declined to provide the relief under the scheme at first when the complainant applied. Hence it is ordered that the complainant would not be liable to pay any further amount or interest other than Rs.43851/- to the bank. Complainant shall pay the above amount within 6 months from the date of receipt of this order failing which the appellant/opposite party would be entitled to claim interest at the rate of 7% per annum from the date of this order. The order of the Forum is modified as above. The order with respect to cost is sustained. In the result the appeal is allowed in part as above. JUSTICE SRI.K.R.UDAYABHANU : PRESIDENT ps | 
