JUDGMENT : Prashant Kumar Mishra, J. Heard. 2. Challenge in this batch of petitions is to the separate orders passed by the Chhattisgarh State Cooperative Tribunal dismissing the Revision Applications of the petitioner, by which, it had prayed for allowing the whole of its claim for recovery of its outstanding loan amount against the private respondents. 3. The facts and issues involved being common in nature in all the above writ petitions, they are disposed of by this common order. 4. The pleadings and documents in WPC No.2566/2018 is referred for brevity and convenience. 5. The private respondents obtained housing loan from the petitioner, which is a Society registered under the Chhattisgarh Cooperative Societies Act, 1960 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act, 1960”). The object of the Society is to grant loan/advances for construction of houses to its members. Respondent No.4 is the registered Primary Society under the Act, 1960. The private respondents applied for loan to respondent No.4, who, in turn, made a request to the petitioner for disbursal of the said loan amount. On such request being made, the private respondents were granted loan through respondent No.4-Society to be paid within 20 years with interest @ 9% per annum and penal interest @ 3% when there is any default in payment of the installments. The rate of interest varies in some cases i.e. 11.5% or 12.5% respectively. 6. Respondent No.5 and like borrowers mortgaged their plots in favour of the petitioner and executed an agreement containing terms and conditions, on which, the loan has been sanctioned and disbursed. On failure of the borrowers to repay the loan, recovery proceedings were initiated against all the borrowers before the Deputy Registrar, Cooperative Societies. The Deputy Registrar allowed the application along with interest @ 9% but rejected the prayer for grant of penal interest @ 3% per annum. The order was affirmed in appeal by the Joint Registrar and on Second Appeal preferred by the petitioner before the Additional Registrar, the said authority remitted the matter back to the Deputy Registrar vide its order dated 15.10.2008. Thereafter, the Deputy Registrar again passed an order on 3.3.2011 maintaining its previous order and this second order of Deputy Registrar has again been affirmed by the Joint Registrar. 7. Thereafter, the Deputy Registrar again passed an order on 3.3.2011 maintaining its previous order and this second order of Deputy Registrar has again been affirmed by the Joint Registrar. 7. In an earlier round of litigation, the Chhattisgarh State Cooperative Tribunal also maintained the order(s) passed by the Deputy Registrar, Joint Registrar and Additional Registrar, but WPC No.370 of 2016 and other connected petitions preferred by the petitioner were allowed by this Court and the matter was remitted back to the Tribunal for fresh consideration. The remand was made for the reason that the Cooperative Tribunal had rejected the petitioner's appeal on the ground that there was no prayer in the recovery application for allowing the penal interest @ 3% per annum but since the application had such a prayer, the matter was remanded. 8. After the matter was remanded, the Cooperative Tribunal again rejected the appeals by the impugned orders by holding that the petitioner has failed to place on record the statement of accounts proving default made by respondent No.5 in making payment of the amount of installments. 9. It is argued by learned counsel for the petitioners that in the recovery application, allegations were made that the borrowers had failed to make payment of the installments and the said pleadings have been admitted in the reply filed by the borrowers. Therefore, an admitted fact is not required to be proved further. 10. I have heard learned counsel for the parties at length and perused the record. 11. Para 4 of the recovery application pleads that the borrowers have failed to make payment of the principal, interest, penal rent and installments and in reply to this part of the pleadings, the borrowers specifically admitted in so many words that due to adverse financial condition they have committed default in repaying the installments. Thus, non-payment of the installments is an admitted position before the Deputy Registrar. 12. Once it is found that the Agreement contains a clause authorizing the petitioner to recover penal interest @ 3% per annum and such pleadings of default in payment of installments have been made in the application, which have been admitted by the borrowers in their reply before the Deputy Registrar, the finding recorded by the Cooperative Tribunal that the petitioner has failed to prove non-payment of installments by the borrowers, is rendered perverse. The finding is absolutely contrary to the terms of the Agreement and the pleadings made by the parties. 13. The entire order of the Tribunal is based on this finding, therefore, once the finding is found perverse, the writ petitions deserve to be and are hereby allowed. The impugned orders are quashed.