Disposed

M.Vijayalakshmi v. South Malabar Gramin Bank

Kerala HC7 Oct 2013WP(C)/19058/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners challenged a bank's recovery proceedings and sought extension of Agricultural Debt Waiver Scheme benefits. The Court held limitation disputes belong to Civil Courts, not writ jurisdiction, and denied scheme benefits as loans were disbursed after the deadline.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition disposed of without prejudice to the remedy regarding limitation; petitioners dis-entitled to scheme benefits.

M.Vijayalakshmi Vs South Malabar Gramin Bank — Contract and Commercial Disputes | Kerala HC (2013)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.CHITAMBARESH

¶4

MONDAY, THE 7TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2013/15TH ASWINA, 1935

¶5

WP(C).No. 19058 of 2013 (F)

¶6

PETITIONER(S):

¶7

M.VIJAYALAKSHMI

¶8

W/O. SADANANDAN, MANIYAMBATH, P.O KONOT

¶9

KOZHIKODE - 673 571

¶10

SREEVALSAN,

¶11

S/O SADANANDAN, MANIYAMBATH, P.O KONOT

¶12

KOZHIKODE 673 571

¶13

BY ADV. SRI.N.K.SANATH KUMAR

¶14

RESPONDENT(S):

¶15

SOUTH MALABAR GRAMIN BANK KURUVATTOR BRANCH, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT 673010 REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGER

¶16

THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KOZHIKODE 673001

¶17

THE SPECIAL DEPUTY TAHSILDAR, ARREARS COLLECTION, REVENUE RECOVERY, KOZHIKODE 673001

¶18

R1 BY ADV. SRI.T.R.RAVI, SC, S.MALABAR G. BANK

¶19

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 07-10-2013, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶20

WP(C).No. 19058 of 2013 (F)

¶21

APPENDIX

¶22

PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS

¶23

EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF KISAN CREDIT CARD NO 463 EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE AGRICUTURAL DEBT WAIVER AND DEBT RELIEF SCHEME 2008 EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE LAWYER NOTICE DATED 31-10-2012 EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY DATED 11-11-2012 EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF RR DEMAND NOTICE DATED 31-05-2013 EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 02-07-2013 TO R2 EXHIBIT P7 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 02-07-2013 TO R3 EXHIBIT P8 TRUE COPY OF THE ACKNOWLEDGEMENT CARD DATED 06-07-2013 EXHIBIT P9 TRUE COPY OF THE ACKNOWLEDGEMENT CARD DATED 05-07-2013 EXHIBIT P10 TRUE COPY OF THE ACKNOWLEDGEMENT CARD DATED 05-07-2013

¶24

RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS : NIL.

¶25

//TRUE COPY//

¶26

P.S. TO JUDGE.

¶27

V.CHITAMBARESH, J.

¶28

W.P (C) No.19058 of 2013

¶29

Dated this the 7^th day of October, 2013

¶30

J U D G M E N T

¶31

Primarily two contentions have been raised by the petitioners and they are,

¶32

i) The remedy of the first respondent Bank has become barred by limitation, and

¶33

ii) The benefit of Agricultural Debt Waiver and Debt Relief Scheme, 2008 should be extended.

¶34

The first respondent Bank has filed a counter affidavit producing along with it Ext.R1(a) accounts statement and Ext.R1(b) loan chalan. Ext.R1(a) statement reveals that fresh disbursement of loan took place on 21.11.2007. The Bank also points out that the petitioners have executed acknowledgment of debts on 28.2.2008 and 8.1.2011.

¶35

The loan should have been availed before 31.3.2007 and overdue on 31.12.2007. The petitioners shall be entitled to the benefit of the scheme only if these conditions are satisfied. But the facts aforesaid reflect that the petitioners are dis-entitled to the benefit since the loan was disbursed after

¶36

¶37

W.P (C) No.19058 of 2013

¶38

31.3.2007 and was not overdue on 31.12.2007.

¶39

The question whether the remedy of the Bank has become barred by limitation cannot be adjudicated in this writ petition. Limitation is a mixed question of fact and law which can be adjudicated only before a Civil Court. No documents has also been produced before me to show that the petitioners are entitled to the benefit of any moratorium clamped by the Government. It is up to the petitioners to move the first respondent Bank and seek for scaling down of interest if permissible.

¶40

The Writ Petition is disposed of without prejudice to the remedy as above.

¶41

V.CHITAMBARESH, Judge.

¶42

nj.

M.Vijayalakshmi v. South Malabar Gramin Bank

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M.Vijayalakshmi v. South Malabar Gramin Bank

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

D.Sundaresan Vs the Authorized Officer

Viswambharabn Vaidyan.S Vs the Authrized Officer

G.Vasumathy Vs State of Kerala

Dr.Bhaskaranunni.K.N. Vs the Debt Recovery Tribunal

Gopalan Vs Indian Overseas Bank

Mahesh S Madhavan Vs State Bank of Mysore