OUSEPH JOSEPH Vs. KOCHUNNY MOOSA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision comes before us on reference by a learned Single Judge. The petitioner is the decree holder. Execution was resisted by the judgment - debtors/respondents with the plea that they were debtors entitled to the benefits of Act 17 of 1977 The Court below dismissed the execution petition with the following observation:

(2.) S.9 of the Act reads as follows:

(3.) The Court below committed an error of jurisdiction in holding that the execution petition should fail because the decree holder did not establish that the judgment debtors were not entitled to the protection of the Act. The Court below did not properly understand the scope of S.9. The order is therefore liable to be set aside and we do so. We would like to observe that the manner of discharging the initial burden by the debtor is either by examining himself on oath or by swearing to an affidavit. The creditor could be called upon to prove the contrary only if this initial burden is discharged in the manner mentioned above.