Date of filing : 21-02-2012

                                                                                    Date of order: 25-04-2012

IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, KASARAGOD

                                         CC. 37/2012

                         Dated this, the  25^th   day of    April  2012

PRESENT

SRI.K.T.SIDHIQ                                             : PRESIDENT

SMT.P.RAMADEVI                                      : MEMBER

SMT.K.G.BEENA                                         : MEMBER

Ramachandran Gatty,                                                                       } Complainant

S/o. Kotti Gatty, R/at Mali House,

Kumbla.Po. Kasaragod.Dt.

(Adv.Prakash Ammannaya, Kasaragod)

1. The Secretary, Kasaragod Primary                                            } Opposite parties

     Co-operative Agricultural & Rural

     Development Bank Ltd,  Kasaragod.Po.                                                        

 2. The  Senior Inspector/ Special Sale Officer

      Kasaragod Primary Co-operative Agricultural

     And Rural Development Bank Ltd,

     Kasaragod.Po.

(Ops 1 & 2. Adv. A.N. Ashok Kumar, Kasaragod)

 3. The Joint Registrar (General),

     Co-operative Society, Civil Station, Vidyanagar.Po.

     Kasaragod.Dt.   

(Exparte)

                                                                        O R D E R  

SMT.K.G.BEENA, MEMBER

            Complainant is an agriculturist who availed agricultural loan from 1^st opposite party bank.  But successive natural calamities and fall in price of agrarian products resulted in crop loss and complainant could not repay the amount.  Therefore the bank has initiated recovery proceedings against the property of the complainant.  According to the complainant his loan ought to have been waived as per the Agriculture Debt Waiver Relief Scheme formulated by the central government in year 2008 (Vidharba package) and 2011.  But opposite parties did not give the benefits of the said scheme to the complainant. Hence the complaint.

2.         Opposite parties 1 & 2 filed vakalath.  Opposite party No.3 set exparte.

3.         Heard opposite parties 1 & 2. The learned counsel for opposite party Sri. Ashokkumar A.C. Produced the copy of the NABARD circular explaining the directions for granting the debt waiver relief to the beneficiaries clause 10-3 of the said scheme envisaged that the beneficiaries of the said scheme can approach the Grievance Redressal Officer for the redressal of their grievances if they have a contention that their names were not included in both lists or the relief calculated is wrong.

4.         The learned counsel for the opposite parties 1 & 2 submitted that since there is an alternative redressal mechanism to the complainant by submitting a representation under clause 10-3 of the ADWAR Scheme they could have take recourse to the said alteration remedy.  Apart from that the Hon’ble High Court of Kerala in WPC No.12552, 12554, 12569 and 12570/2011 has directed the beneficiaries of the said agriculture Debt Waiver and Debt Relief Scheme 2008 to approach the  Grievance Redressal Officer.

5.         In view of the above discussions and in view of the judgment of the Hon’ble High Court of Kerala cited above we direct the complainant to approach the Grievance  Redressal Officer within one month from the date of receipt of this order.  The Grievance Redressal Officer shall consider representation and dispose the same expeditiously. It is made clear that if no representation is filed by the complainant as stipulated in clause 10 (3) of ADWAR Scheme within the time mentioned above then the opposite parties shall be free to continue recovery proceedings initiated by them.

            The complaint is disposed as above.

MEMBER                                           MEMBER                                           PRESIDENT.

Pj/