Lilu alias Wali Deen vs State Bank of India

L.N. Mittal, J

Judgment debtor (in short, ''JD'') Lilu @ Wali Deen has filed this revision petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India assailing order dated 31.05.2011 (Annexure P-1) and order dated 08.05.2010 (Annexure P-2) passed by Executing Court i.e. learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Jagadhari. Suit filed by the respondent-State Bank of India-decree holder (in short, ''DH'') was decreed. In execution petition, JD filed objections seeking benefit of Agricultural Debt Waiver And Debt Relief Scheme, 2008 (in short, ''the Scheme'') floated by the Central Government. DH-Bank resisted the said claim and pleaded that JD is not a small farmer because he has already mortgaged 48 kanals 1 marla land i.e. 6 acres 1 marla land with DH-Bank by way of registered mortgaged deed dated 17.11.1998 and thus being owner of land in excess of 5 acres, he is not small farmer. It was also submitted on behalf of DH that JD could be granted relief of Rs. 70,000/-only under the Scheme subject to the condition that he deposited the balance due amount of Rs. 2,24,514/-up to 30.06.2010. The Executing Court passed order (Annexure P-2) accordingly dismissing the objections of the JD except that he would be entitled to the said relief of Rs. 70,000/-if he deposited the balance amount of Rs. 2,24,514/-up to 30.06.2010. It appears that JD did not deposit the said balance amount. Consequently, the Executing Court vide order (Annexure P-1) ordered auction of attached land of JD. Feeling aggrieved, JD has filed this revision petition.

I have heard counsel for the petitioner and perused the case file whereas none has appeared for the respondent in spite of last opportunity.

This revision petition qua order (Annexure P-2) dated 08.05.2010 is barred by delay and laches having been instituted on 02.07.2011 i.e. almost 1 year and 2 months after the passing of the said order. As regards order (Annexure P-1), the said order is only consequential order regarding sale of attached land. The basic order is Annexure P-2, vide which objections of the JD were disposed of.

However, even on merit, the petitioner cannot succeed. Counsel for the petitioner contended that according to reports (Annexures P-4 and P-5), the petitioner is owner of 26 kanals 14 marlas land only i.e. less than 5 acres and, therefore, he is a small farmer as defined in the Scheme and is, therefore, entitled to waiver of total decretal amount under the Scheme. The contention cannot be accepted. Reports (Annexures P-4 and P-5) have been made on sale warrants regarding share of JD in 35 kanals 19 marlas land, but these reports do not indicate that total agricultural holding of the petitioner JD is 26 kanals 14 marlas only. On the contrary, undisputed mortgaged deed, on the basis of which the suit had already been decreed, depicts that petitioner was owner of at least 48 kanals 1 marla land which he mortgaged with DH-Bank. The petitioner is thus owner of land in excess of 5 acres and, therefore, does not fall within the definition of small farmer and is, therefore, not entitled to relief under the said category. In view of the aforesaid, I find that there is no infirmity much less illegality, perversity or jurisdictional error in the impugned orders of the Executing Court so as to call for interference by this Court in exercise of supervisory power under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. The revision petition is meritless and is accordingly dismissed.