The petitioner is aggrieved with the non consideration of her loan account under Ext.P2 Circular dated 23.05.2008. The petitioner on being not covered under the said Circular, was before the Assistant Registrar of Co-operative Societies, who had rejected her claim also by Ext.P3. 2. The contention of the petitioner, going by the mortgage deed executed before the Bank is that, evidently the loan was an agricultural loan and the same was covered under Ext.P2. The Bank has specifically denied it, contending that, despite the application being shown as an agricultural loan, records would reveal that the petitioner has availed of the loan specifically for purchase of property.
3. The petitioner has not denied such claim. The contention of the petitioner is that in fact, purchase of pump sets and other machinery for agriculture would also be categorized as agricultural loan as per Ext.P2 and hence, the petitioner's purchase of property also could be taken as one such application which would result in increase in the productivity. The fact that the petitioner had purchased land and not any agricultural equipment to increase the productivity of the land, would go against such contention. The Assistant Registrar also has specifically found that the petitioner's loan was for the purchase of land which cannot be taken as an agricultural loan.
4. Clause 3.2 of Ext.P2 specifically defines agricultural loans. An agricultural loan is defined as a loan which has re-payment of 18 months and which is availed for the purpose of agriculture. Reliance placed on clause 3.3 by the learned counsel would not be applicable since the capital investments referred to in clause 3.3(a) is specifically with respect to the improvement of land by purchase of equipments and does not speak of the purchase of property itself. For all the above reasons, petitioner's claim to be covered under Ext.P2 Circular is found to be devoid of merit.
5. However, considering the impecunious circumstances of the petitioner, it is directed that the coercive proceedings shall be kept in abeyance on condition of the petitioner settling the entire loan in twelve equal monthly instalments. The respondent-Bank shall quantify the dues as on 30.11.2014 and issue a statement of accounts, in accordance with which the instalments shall be paid. The 1st instalment shall be paid on or before 18.11.2014 and thereafter; the due date of instalments falling on the 18th of each succeeding month. If default is committed in two consecutive instalments, then the recovery proceedings shall be revived and continued. On the satisfaction of the dues as per the statement, the Bank shall give a statement of the future interest from 30.11.2014 and the same shall be settled as the 13th instalment.
The writ petition stands disposed of, leaving the parties to suffer their respective costs.
Sd/-
K.VINOD CHANDRAN Judge Mrcs //True Copy//