V KRISHNA MENON Vs. NARAYANA PRABHU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an appeal by the decree holder who sought to take out execution of the decree. The 1st respondent objected on 5-8-1959 and contended that the debt for which the decree was obtained is a debt coming within the purview of the Kerala Agriculturists Debt Relief Act, 1958 and that therefore the decree should be amended in accordance with the provisions in S.7 of the Act. According to the appellant, the 1st respondent was not an agriculturist on the crucial date, 5-8-1959, when he objected to the execution of the decree and demanded amendment of the decree by scaling down the amount provided by the decree. The above Act contemplates that a person who claims the benefit of the Act must be an agriculturist on the date on which the Act came into force. The only two relevant provisions of the statute are the definitions of Agriculturist in S.2(a) and S.7 of the above Act which reads as follows:

(2.) We may also refer to the definition of the term debt contained in S.2(c) of the Act and it is possible that a debt incurred by an agriculturist before the commencement of the Act will be a debt within the meaning of the definition of the term debt contained in the statute. If the ordinary literal meaning is given to S.7 there can be no doubt that the judgment debtor who claims the benefit of the Act must be an agriculturist on the date on which he claims the benefit conferred by the Act. The words used are: it shall, on the application of any judgment debtor who is an agriculturist. This necessarily means that at the time of making the application, the judgment debtor must be an agriculturist. We think that this would be so even if we incorporate the definition of the term Agriculturist in S.2(a) in S.7. So incorporated the relevant part of S.7(1) will read thus:

(3.) This means that on the date of the application the judgment debtor should have an interest in agricultural or horticultural property. Admittedly the 1st respondent did not have such an interest for he had sold away his agricultural property before he objected to execution on 6-8-1959. This fact is admitted.