High Courts

Narsingh Rai vs U.P.R.S.K.A.G.Vikas Bank Ltd.Ghazipur

Allahabad High Court · Decided on 18 December 2008 · Citation: (2008) 12 AHC CK 0095

HON’BLE JUDGES
S.U.Khan, J
RESULT
Disposed Of
Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

8 paragraphs · 577 words

S.U. Khan, J.

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

Petitioner borrowed Rs.8,500/ from Ghazipur branch of respondent bank for installing pumping set in his agricultural field in the year 1987. At that time the State Government had floated a scheme granting 33% subsidy on agricultural loans. Accordingly, petitioner was liable to return only an amount of Rs.5695/ (or Rs.5500/) alongwith interest. Petitioner did not pay a single instalment. Thereafter, in the year 1990 another scheme was floated by the government waiving the loans upto the amount of Rs.10,000/ given for agricultural purposes on certain conditions. On 30.06.1990 bank asked the petitioner to pay the unpaid instalments. According to the said notice an amount of Rs.2400/ was payable till then and the petitioner was directed to deposit the said amount by 30.01.1991 i.e. after seven months from the receipt of the notice. Instead of depositing the amount petitioner filed this writ petition in March 1991. Recovery was stayed until further order.

In the counter affidavit it has been stated that the loan was given to the petitioner on 18.01.1988 and 65% of the said amount along with interest was payable in nine equal annual instalments and the loan was to be returned along with interest of 15% per annum. It has further been stated that subsidy of Rs.3000/ was granted, the annual instalment payable was of Rs.800/ and three instalments falling due on 1.4.1989, 1.4.1990 and 1.4.1991 had not been paid. With regard to the benefit of loan waiver scheme to the extent of Rs.10000/ it has been stated in the counter affidavit that petitioner was not entitled to the said benefit as he did not produce any certificate from Revenue Authorities to the effect that crops had failed due to excess rains between 02.10.1986 and 02.10.1989 which was condition precedent for loan waiver under the said scheme of 1990.

The waiver scheme has been annexed as part of Annexure CA2 which is a communication by Registrar Cooperative Societies U.P. to all the District Magistrates giving therein the details of G.O. dated 30.05.1990 through which loans were waived as amended by G.O. dated 11.07.1990. Condition no.3 of the said scheme was that the benefit would be available to those borrowers who were not defaulter till the effective date which was 2.10.1989 under condition no.1 of the said scheme. Second category under the said scheme was of those borrowers who had taken the loan after April 1986 and their crops had failed for two or more years due to excessive rains and in that regard they produced certificate.

Even in the writ petition it has not been stated that crops of the petitioner failed in any year. The only thing mentioned in the writ petition is that the pumping set developed some defect. No rejoinder affidavit has been filed. Accordingly it can not be said that petitioner is covered by loan waiver scheme of 1990.

However as petitioner is a small farmer and was under impression that he was covered by loan waiver scheme of 1990 and stay order has also been granted by this Court on 06.03.1991 hence in case he pays the total due amount of Rs.7200/(nine annual instalment of Rs. 800/ each) within three months from today then no further amount as interest etc. shall be payable. In case of default the entire amount along with interest due till date may be recovered from the petitioner like arrears of land revenue.

Writ petition is disposed of.