PEOVISION OF BORROWING FACILITIES. 247 



for so recovering their debts instead of allowing them to accumulate 

 till recovery is only possible by sale of the land itself. The expense 

 .and dilatoriness of the Civil Court procedure tend necessarily, they 

 urge, to the latter mode of recovery. As they attach very great 

 importance to this part of the scheme, we think that the concession 

 should be granted in a restricted form. We therefore propose to 

 confine the privilege to the case of debtors whose affairs are liquidated 

 by the Government in co-operation with the bank, and to restrict it 

 to a period not exceeding 10 years. This would apparently be 

 accepted by the promoters of the bank, and it is justified by the 

 consideration that the bank takes the place of Government in regard 

 to the liquidated debts of the ryots. Within this period we would 

 allow the bank to recover through the revenue authorities from the 

 debtor and his successors in interest, not only the original advance, 

 but also subsequent loans made to him for whatever purpose by the 

 bank. We would require the bank to furnish proof that it had 

 attempted to recover the debt through its own agents, and we would 

 prescribe light fees on all processes. We would further suspend the 

 the execution of such processes in any season in which the Govern- 

 ment may have thought it right to suspend the land revenue payable 

 on the debtor's land. In respect of other debtors, whose affairs had 

 not been liquidated, the bank's remedies would be restricted to the 

 ordinary provisions of the Civil Code. We are also willing to exempt 

 the bank from stamp duty on bonds and documents connected with 

 advances to all classes of debtors, and from Court fees on the insti- 

 tution of civil suits, for a period not exceeding 10 years, to be fixed 

 by the Government of Bombay. We would also for a similar period 

 exempt the bank from registration fees. 



9. As to the priority to be given to the bank in respect of its claims, 

 we originally were of opinion that it would be sufficient if the bank 

 were placed in the position of first mortgagee in respect of the 

 liquidated debts which it took over from Government, and also in 

 respect of any loans which were received for, and bond fide applied to, 

 land improvement. The Poona Committee, however, have objected 

 to this limitation, and urge the impossibility of the bank distinguish- 

 ing in regard to the purposes to which its loans may be applied ; and 

 .jifter fully considering the point, we are now prepared to assent to a 

 provision that, where the bank has under the liquidation proceedings 

 acquired the position of the first mortgagee, it should be given, in 



