VENKATARAMANA JOIS Vs. SHANBHOG VEERAPPIAH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner prays that the order, dated 17th June 1949, passed by the Munsiff of Hassan in Os. No. 658/47-48 on the file of his Court be revised. The suit was for the recovery of money due on a pronote executed by the petitioner and two other s who have been impleaded as the co-defendants of the petitioner in the suit. The two co-defendants of the petitioner accepted the allegation of the plaintiff that they were agriculturists but the petitioner contended that he was not an agriculturist. T he learned Munsiff, relying upon Sections 3 and 24, Mysore Agriculturists' Relief Act, decided the issue against the petitioner (defendant 3) and held that he also was an agriculturist. Hence this petition. The Revision, Judge, before whom this petition came up for hearing, has ordered the petition to be posted for a Bench as it in volves an important question of law regarding the interpretation question of law regarding the interpretation of Sections 3 and 24, Mysore Agriculturists' Relief Act.

(2.) The order of the learned Munsiff shows that he has relied entirely upon the interpretation of Section 3 and 24, Mysore Agriculturists' Relief Act, to give the finding that defendant 3 is an agriculturist. The learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the interpretation of the learned Munsiff of Section 3 and 24, Mysore Agriculturists Relief Act, is not warranted by the language used in those sections. He submitted that the admissions of defendants 1 and 2 that they were agriculturists cannot in any way make the petitioner who, is a non-agriculturist, an agriculturist. The portion of Section 3 Clause. (i), Mysore Agriculturists' Relief Act, relevant to the consideration of the question before us reads as follows:

(3.) The provisions of this Regulation shall apply to (i) suits in which the defendant or any one of he defendants is an agriculturist for the recovery of money alleged to be due to the plaintiff.." These words show that the section has reference only to the description and nature of suits and has no reference to the status of the parties to a transaction, viz. whether all or any of them is an agriculturist. The section of the Act, which deals with the question whether and when a person can be deemed to be an agriculturist, is Section 2 of the Act. That section reads as follows: