1. In Jahuri Yadav V/s. Bank of India, a learned Judge of this Court, sitting singly, passed a very brief order reported in 1998 (3) Pat LJR 214, declaring that in agricultural loans it was not permissible for the Bank to charge interest at a rate higher than 6.5%. The declaration was said to be in accordance with the decision of the Supreme Court in Corporation Bank V/s. D. S. Gowda, (1994) 5 SCC 213 : (1994 AIR SCW 2721).

2. The order passed by this Court in the case of Jahuri Yadav seems to have caused a state of uncertainty in the matter of recovery of Bank loans. A case came to the notice of this Court in which a District Certificate Officer had issued a general direction to all the Banks in the district asking them to recalculate their dues in agricultural advances charging interest @ 6.5% as directed in the order passed by this Court. It was also reported to this Court that relying upon the order passed in the case of Jahuri Yadav a large number of suits were filed in civil Courts seeking direction to the Banks to determine the overdue amounts in recovery proceedings by charging interest @ 6.5%. The case in hand is another case in which the petitioner seeks relief(s) on the basis of the order passed by this Court in the case of Jahuri Yadav, (1998 (3) Pat LJR 214).

3. On 12-9-1990 the petitioner took a loan of Rs. 1,20,000.00 for purchase of a tractor from the State Bank of India, Agricultural Development Branch, Motihari. According to the agreement executed by the petitioner and his wife, the loan amount with interest was repayable in nine instalments in the following manner :

4. It is undeniable that the petitioner was not able to keep the repayment schedule given in the loan agreement as quoted above.

5. The basic facts concerning the petitioners loan from the Bank can be taken from the counter-affidavit filed on behalf of the Bank which appears to be quite reliable on the fact position of the case. It is stated that the full loan amount was disbursed to the petitioner on 17-12-1990. From that date till June 1992, deposits made towards repayment of loan only amounted to Rs. 55,906.15 and thereafter no repayment was made in the Loan Account. In the meanwhile, the overdues increased with the accrual of interest. As regards the application of interest it is stated in paragraph 9 of the counter-affidavit, as follows :"xx xx xx the Bank as per the agreement itself was entitled to charge penal interest apart from interest charged in the month of May and November at the agreed rate of 12.5%, which was accordingly done."

6. As the result of accrual of interest the overdues as on 29-6-1997, the date was on which certificate proceeding was instituted against the petitioner stood at Rs. 2,18,048; adding to it the Court-fee amount of Rs. 6,640.00 the certificate was issued for Rs. 2,24,488.00 (sic). It is further stated that after the initiation of the certificate proceeding when distress warrant was issued against the petitioner, he deposited a further sum of Rs. 1,38,015.00 . Thus against the certificate amount of Rs. 2,24,488.00 there was still an outstanding balance of Rs. 86,433(sic) plus the interest accrued on the certificate amount in terms of S. 17 of the Bihar and Orissa Public Demands Recovery Act from the date of the institution of the certificate proceeding in June 1997 till date.

7. It was in those circumstances that the District Certificate Officer, Motihari issued a notice, dated 23-9-1998 in Certificate Case No. 36/1997-98 asking the petitioner to make payment of Rs. 90,000.00 being the banks overdues till that date. At that stage that the petitioner came to this Court in this writ petition seeking to challenge the notice and making the grievance that despite all the payments made by him the loan amount seemed to be further growing. In this case a direction was prayed for, asking the respondents to issue a fresh demand charging interest @6.5% as decided in the case of Jahuri Yadav V/s. Bank of India, (19