By. Sri. Chandran Alachery, Member:
The complaint is filed under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act for an order directing the opposite party to include the loan of Rs.4,00,000/- with interest in the Debt Relief Package of 2008 announced by the Central Government and to write off the same.
2. Brief of the complaint:- The complainant availed a loan of Rs.4,00,000/- from the opposite party on 27.04.2000 for ginger cultivation under crop loan scheme. The complainant pledged 2.15 acres of land as security. The ginger cultivation was a failure and the complainant could not repay the loan and it became due. The opposite party bank filed a suit before Sub-court, Sulthan Bathery as OS 25/2013 and the Honorable Sub-court decreed the suit on 30.09.2006. The opposite party bank filed Execution proceedings as EP 6/07 against the complainant. But it was dismissed on 12.07.2012. The complainant is a small farmer having only 4.22 acres of land in his possession. The complainant is entitled for the full benefit of Debt relief Scheme of Central Government. The opposite party bank again filed EP 19/2013 for the recovery of the amount. That EP 49/2013 is still pending before the Sub-court, Sulthan Bathery. The act of opposite party, in not including the loan of complainant in the said Relief scheme and write off the entire loan and interest which is eligible as per the condition of the scheme and it become due during the prescribed period is a deficiency of service from the part of opposite party. Hence this complaint.
3. On receipt of complaint, notice was served to opposite party and opposite party appeared before the Forum and filed version. In the version, the opposite party contented that the complainant had not taken any contention before the Honorable Sub-court in the suit filed against him. Now EP 49/13 is pending against him for recovery. The opposite party denied the averment in complaint that the entire loan amount of complainant is to be waived under Agricultural Debt Waiver and Debt Relief Scheme 2008 is false and the complainant is not a small farmer. The complainant does not belong to the category of small farmer. The complainant belong to 'other farmer' who cultivate more than 2 hectors. The complainant had availed the loan for cultivating ginger in 48 acres of land although he had mortgaged 2 acres and 15 cents of land only. Under the scheme, other farmer are eligible for a relief of 25% of the loan due as on 29.02.2008. The opposite party bank send notice stating these facts to the complainant. As per scheme, the balance amount after waiving 25% of the amount had to be paid in three installments before 30.06.2009 by the complainant. But the complainant did not paid the amount, hence the complainant was not eligible to get the benefit of the scheme. So opposite party stated that there is no deficiency of service from the opposite party.
4. On perusal of complaint, version and affidavits, the Forum raised the following points for consideration:-
1. Whether there is any deficiency of service from the part of opposite party?
2. Relief and Cost.
5. Point No.1:- The complainant filed proof affidavit and is examined as PW1 and Ext.A1 is marked. The opposite party also filed proof affidavit and opposite party is examined as OPW1 and Exts.B1 to B3 is marked. On perusal of documents, it is found that the complainant had pledged 2.15 acres of land for availing loan from the opposite party. The opposite party bank also admitted that the complainant had pledged only 2.15 acres of land. The case of opposite party is that the complainant had cultivated 48 acres of ginger cultivation for which the loan is availed. So the case of opposite party is that the complainant is not a small farmer, the complainant belongs to other farmers group. The complainant's case is that he is having only 2.15 acres and is a small farmer and availed loan only after pledging the 2.15 acres of land. It is up to the opposite party to prove that the complainant belongs to other farmers group. The opposite party did not produce any documents to show that the complainant availed loan after pledging more than 2.15 acres or any other valid document. Ext.B2 is a photo copy of a document obtained by the opposite party from Beenachi Estate Accounts Officer. In Ext.B2, no signature of the complainant is there, No supporting evidence is produced to prove that the complainant actually availed loan after pledging more than 2.15 acres. On perusal, it is found that the only basic document pledged as security to avail the loan is the document of 2.15 acres of land only. The opposite party failed to prove otherwise. The complainant availed agricultural loan and he pledged 2.15 acres of land. So as per documents, he belongs to small farmers group. The opposite party contented that the complainant is cultivating ginger in 48 acres of land and there is lease agreement with Beenachi Estate. But the opposite party did not produce the lease agreement to prove the contention that the loan applied and sanctioned is after pledging this 48 acres of land agreement also. So on analyzing the entire evidence and documents, it is found that the complainant pledged only 2.15 acres of land and the complainant belongs to small farmer group. The small farmers also availed agricultural loan and it becomes due as per the conditions stated in the Agricultural Debt Waiver and Debt Relief Scheme 2008, such farmers are entitled to get the full waiver. So here in this case, the complainant is entitled to get the full waiver under the scheme 2008. The act of opposite party in not allowing the full waiver of debt of the complainant is a gross deficiency of service from the part of opposite party. The point No.1 is found accordingly.
6. Point No.2 :- Since the Point No.1 is found in favour of complainant, the complainant is entitled to get cost and compensation and opposite party is liable for the same.
In the result, the complaint is partly allowed and the opposite party is directed to give waiver of 25% of the outstanding loan amount in the loan account of the complainant as bank's share and also to give waiver of 50% of the outstanding loan amount in the loan account of the complainant as coffee Board's scheme. The opposite party can reimburse the 50% share of loan waiver from the coffee board thereafter. The balance 25% of the outstanding loan amount will be borne and to be remitted by the complainant. The opposite party is also directed to pay Rs.5,000/- (Rupees Five Thousand) only as compensation and Rs.5,000/- (Rupees Five Thousand) only as cost of the proceedings. All the parties shall comply the order within 30 days from the date of receipt of this Order.
Dictated to the Confidential Assistant, transcribed by him and corrected by me and Pronounced in the Open Forum on this the 17th day of March 2015.
Date of Filing:08.10.2013.
PRESIDENT :Sd/-
MEMBER :Sd/-
/True Copy/
Sd/-
PRESIDENT, CDRF, WAYANAD.
APPENDIX.
Witness for the complainant:-
PW1. Baby Eldho. Complainant.
Witness for the Opposite Party:-
OPW1. Vinod. T. A. Manager, Catholic Syrian Bank,
Sulthan Bathery Branch.
Exhibits for the complainant:
A1. Copy of Petition submitted in Sub-Court Sulthan Bathery.
Exhibits for the opposite party:-
B1. Copy of Letter. dt:06.02.2009.
B2. Copy of Letter. dt:19.04.2000.
Sd/-
PRESIDENT, CDRF, WAYANAD.
a/-
