MATHEW D. ELAVUNKAL Vs. THE FEDERAL BANK LTD.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE two cases are being heard and disposed of by this common judgment, since the issue involved in them is common.

(2.) THE appeal is filed by the petitioner in W.P. (C) No. 35363 of 2010 challenging the judgment dated 12.07.2013 of the learned Single Judge. W.P. (C) No. 612 of 2014 is filed by one Valsamma Mathew who is the wife of Sri. Mathew D. Elavunkal, the petitioner in W.P. (C) No. 35363 of 2010. They stood as surety for each other in respect of two loan transactions. They claimed the benefit declared by the 1st respondent Bank under the 'Agricultural Debt Waiver and Debt Relief Scheme, 2008'. According to them, they were small farmers as defined under Clause 3.6 of the said Scheme, as they own only an extent of 5 acres of land. As far as they are small farmers, they were entitled for waiver of loan amount with interest as provided under the Scheme. The 1st respondent had not extended the said benefit was the complaint.

(3.) THE learned counsel for the appellant and writ petitioner would submit on the basis of the definition at Clause 3.6 of Ext. P4 Scheme and Explanation 1 that he is a small farmer. Clause 3.6 and Explanation read as under: