K P DEVASSAY Vs. ANTHONY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Revision sought for here is of an order passed in execution in a small cause suit holding that the defendants are not entitled to the benefits of the Kerala Agriculturists' Debt Relief Act, 11 of 1970, for short the Act. The decree was obtained for pumping charges due to plaintiff for bailing out water from certain paddy fields. Under the contract between the parties, the plaintiff had to make the fields fit for sowing seeds before the 15th of Makarom and in any event not later than the 20th of Makarom. If the work was completed only after the 20th of Makarom, it was open to the defendants either to raise cultivations or not to do so. If they raised cultivations, they had to pay the plaintiff the charges for bailing out water. The fields were made ready for cultivation by the plaintiff only after the 20th of Makarom and the defendants raised cultivations on them. It was then that the suit was filed and decree obtained. The application of the defendants filed in execution for reliefs under the Act was resisted by the plaintiff on the ground that the debt was one exempted from the provisions of the Act by S.2(4)(e) of it.

(2.) The material portion of the section reads:

(3.) Argument of counsel appearing for defendants is that the word "otherwise" occurring in S.2(4)(e) of the Act should be read ejusdem generis with "salary", that is to say, the remuneration should be due as "salary" or the like for "services rendered'' and that the words "salary" and "services rendered" implied a master and servant relationship. The meaning of the word "salary" as given in the Concise Oxford Dictionary is "fixed periodical payment made to person doing other than manual or mechanical work". The word ''service" as given in the dictionary has different meanings. One meaning no doubt is "being servant, servant's status, master's or mistress, employ". But another meaning is "use, assistance (can I, will it, be of service to you)". Assistance given by a nurse to a patient, assistance given by a lawyer to court are all services. Yet there is no master and servant relationship between them. In the absence of any restriction given to the word "services" in the section, it has to be given its plain and ordinary meaning without any limitation. Dewatering of the fields by the plaintiff was service rendered by him to the defendants. But the liability in cash for the services rendered was not a periodical payment. So it was not salary and if the word "otherwise" has to be read ejusdem generis with the word "salary" which precedes it, that is to say, if the word "otherwise" is construed in such a sense as to confine it to the class or genus of "salary" which it follows, S.2(4)(e) of the Act may not apply to the instant case as the liability was not in respect of salary or the like for services rendered. But can the rule of ejusdem generis be applied for the interpretation of the word "otherwise" occurring in S.2(4)(e)