D.o.F.19/11/11

D.o.O:22/5/12

 IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, KASARAGOD

                             CC.No.311/2011

                        Dated this, the 22nd day of May  2012

PRESENT

SRI.K.T.SIDHIQ                                 : PRESIDENT

SMT.RAMADEVI.P                       : MEMBER   

SMT.BEENA.K.G                             : MEMBER

Saudaminiamma, W/o Unnikrishnan Nair,

Ottapuraykal House, Chirakarapadi,

Kanhirapoil  .PO    Kasaragod. Dt.                                      : Complainant

 (Adv.E.Sukumaran,Hosdurg)

1.The  Manager,

Hosdurg Primary Co-operative Agricultural & Rural

Development Bank Ltd, Chullikkara Branch, Po Padimaruth

Hosdurg,Kasaragod.Dt.

2.The Senior Inspector/Special Sale Officer

Hosdurg Primary Co-operative Agricultural & Rural                 

Development Bank Ltd, Kanhangad Po ,Kasaragod.            : Opposite parties .

(Ops 1 &2 Adv.Vipin .T.Jose,Hosdurg)

3.The Assistant Manager, Reserve Bank of India,           

 Rural Planning & Credit Department,

Bekary Junction,   P.B.No.6507, Thiruvananthapuram.    :

(Exparte)

4.The General Manager(Convener)

  Canara Bank, State Level Bankers Committees Cell

Circle Office, Canara Bank Bldg PB No.159

M.G. Road, Trivandrum

(Adv.Sadananda Kamath,Kasaragod)

     ORDER

SRI.K.T.SIDHIQ: PRESIDENT

               Complainant is an agriculturist who availed agricultural loan from  the Ist 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 her loan ought to have been waived as per the Agriculture Debt Waiver Relief Scheme  formulated by the Central Govt. in 2008.  But opposite party did not give the benefits of the said scheme to the complainant.  Hence the complaint.

     According to the opposite parties the complainant has already given all the benefits of the Debt Relief Scheme and she is not entitled for any further waiver of loan.  Further the Grievance Redressal Officer already considered her grievance and he also found that no further benefits are grantable to the complainant.

   In the circumstances, we do not see any merits in the complaint.  Hence the complaint is dismissed with no order as to costs.  

Sd/                                                            Sd/                                                Sd/

MEMBER                                            MEMBER                                     PRESIDENT

eva                                                              /Forwarded by Order/

                                                              SENIOR SUPERINTENDENT