NEELAKANTA IYER SUBRAMONIA IYER Vs. KANJUPARAMPAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The decree holder has preferred this appeal against the lower courts order permitting the judgment - debtor to pay the debt in instalments in accordance with the Kerala Agriculturists Debt Relief Act, Act 31 of 1958.

(2.) The point urged on behalf of the decree holder is that a person who is assessed to agricultural income tax under the Agricultural Income Tax Act of 1950 of Travancore-Cochin will not be entitled to the benefits of Act 31 of 1958. The argument is that he is excluded from the definition of agriculturist as given in S.2 clause (a) of Act 31 of 1958. The relevant clause to be considered in this connection is clause (iii) of S.2 (a). Three conditions have to be satisfied before this sub clause (iii) can be attracted. They are that the debtor must be one who is assessed to agricultural income, he must have been so assessed for two years within the three years preceding Act 31 of 1958 and that the assessment must be for an income exceeding Rs. 5000/. We are unable to accept the appellants contention that the Rs. 5000 limit referred to above applies only to an assessment under any law relating to agricultural income other than the Agricultural Income Tax Act of 1950 of T. C. The provision as it stands is clear enough to indicate that assessment on income over Rs. 5000 per annum is an essential condition for excluding a debtor from the benefits of Act 31 of 1958. In the present case it is conceded that the debtor has been assessed to agricultural income below Rs. 5000 only. It follows therefore that he does not come within the exclusion contemplated by sub clause (iii) of S.2(a) of Act 31 of 1958. The lower court was right in holding that the respondent debtor is an agriculturist entitled to the benefits of Act 31 of 1958. The order permitting him to pay the debt in instalments under the provisions of that Act calls for no interference.

(3.) In the result this appeal is dismissed with costs.