Chandigarh, August 3: The Punjab and Haryana High Court on Wednesday asked the Punjab Government to attend to the problem and cases of “kurki” of agricultural land and tractors belonging to farmers in the execution of court decrees obtained by commercial banks and arhtiyas or commission agents.
Responding to the suggestions, Advocate-General Atul Nanda assured the court that the issue would be taken up by state with utmost seriousness. The developments took place on a PIL filed by advocate Hari Chand Arora. He was seeking review of Section 60 of the Civil Procedure Code, which permitted attachment and sale of land and tractors belonging to the farmers in the execution of court decrees.
In the petition place before the Bench headed by Justice SS Saron, Arora stated that milch animals, cart, bullocks, farm implements etc were protected against attachment and sale under the legislation enacted in 1908.The situation has changed over last 109 years. Now, farm holdings were small and the land was tilled by tractors. Most of farmers committing suicides were having five acres or less. Once the commercial banks or commission agents/arhtiyas obtained money decree from the courts and took steps for attachment and sale of the land, the farmers were left with no other option except committing suicide.Arora also told the Bench that farmers with land holding up to five acres fell within the category of below the poverty line. Divesting him of his meagre land and tractor could not be justified.Arora pleaded that the state government vide notification dated July 21 deleted provisions of Section 67-A of the Punjab Cooperative Societies Act, thereby preventing registrars, cooperative societies, from attaching and selling land of farmers for recovering debts of cooperative societies and cooperative banks from defaulting farmers.But defaulters of commercial banks or arhtiyas had been discriminated against. The sword of “kurkis” at the instance of commercial banks and commission agents was still hanging. Arora submitted that the government was having power to make “state amendment” to Section 60 of Civil Procedure Code, 1908. The archaic and obsolete law should, as such, be modified in view of change in ground realities.
News Source: http://www.tribuneindia.com/
