INDIAN BANK NAGAPATTINAM BRANCH Vs. DHARMAIYAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE Appellant/Plaintiff (Bank) has preferred this Second Appeal as against the Judgment and Decree dated 22.08.1996 in A.S.No.76 of 1996 passed by the Learned Additional Sub Judge, Nagapattinam in confirming the Judgment and Decree dated 12.08.1992 in O.S.No.41 of 1989 passed by the Learned District Munsif, Nagapattinam.

(2.) THE First Appellate Court, while delivering the Judgment in A.S.No.76 of 1996, on 22.08.1996, has among other things, observed that in Ex.A1-Term Loan Agreement for Agricultural Loans, dated 28.07.1983, it is mentioned as 'Agricultural Loan' and in that aforesaid circumstance, the contentions advanced on behalf of the Appellant/Plaintiff (Bank) that the loan granted to the first Respondent/first Defendant cannot be construed to be a loan of connected Agriculture in nature and the contention of the Appellant/Plaintiff (Bank) in this regard is not accepted and accordingly, it has come to a conclusion that as per Sections 2(g) and 2(d) of Agricultural and Rural Debt Relief Scheme, 1990, the loan is a eligible loan and the established Gobar Gas Plant got repaired within six months, which has not been denied on behalf of the Appellant/Plaintiff (Bank) and in view of the fact that the first Respondent/first Defendant is entitled to get the benefit as per the aforesaid Scheme, the Appellant/Plaintiff (Bank) is not entitled to get the reliefs and dismissed the Appeal with costs, thereby confirming the Judgment and Decree passed by the trial Court.

(3.) IT is the contention of the Learned Counsel for the Appellant/Plaintiff that the first Respondent/first Defendant has not established that he is entitled to the benefit as per Sections 2(g) and 2(d) of the Agricultural and Rural Debt Relief Scheme, 1990.