AHAMED Vs. USHA TRADING CORPORATION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These two Civil Revision Petitions arise out of execution proceedings in two suits where money decrees have been passed against the respondents, the judgment debtors Before the executing court the judgment debtors contended that the decree debts had become discharged under Ordinance No. 1 of 1977. That claim was rejected by the executing court on the ground that the Ordinance had been repealed by Act 17 of 1977 and that under the terms of Act 17 of 1977 the judgment debtors are not persons entitled to the benefits of S.3 of that Act. The judgment debtors have come up to this Court with these Civil Revision Petitions contending that the said view taken by the executing court is incorrect and illegal.

(2.) The Kerala Debt Relief Ordinance, 1977 Ordinance No. 1 of 1977 was promulgated by the Governor on 13/01/1977 and it was published in the Kerala Gazette Extra ordinary No 21 on the same date. S.3 of the Ordinance provided inter alia that notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force, or in any contract or in any decree or order of court, with effect on and from the commencement of the said Ordinance, every debt and the interest thereon payable by a debtor to a creditor shall be deemed to be wholly discharged, that no civil court shall entertain any suitor other proceeding against a debtor for the recovery of any debt or part of a debt or any interest thereon and that all suits and other proceedings including appeals, revision petitions, applications for review, proceedings for attachment and execution proceedings pending on the date of commencement of the Ordinance against any debtor for the recovery of any debt shall abate. The expression "debtor" was defined in clause (6) of S.2 as meaning "any person whose annual income does not exceed two thousand and four hundred rupees, from whom any debt is due and includes (a) landless labourer; (b) an artisan; and (c) a kudikidappukaran." Certain categories of persons are, however, excluded from the scope of the said definition by sub clauses (i) to (iv) but it is unnecessary for our present purpose to set out the contents of those sub clauses.

(3.) Ordinance 1 of 1977 was later repealed and replaced by the Kerala Debt Relief Ordinance No. 9 of 1977 promulgated by the Governor on 6th May 1977. The provisions of this Ordinance were identical with those contained in Ordinance No 1 of 1977. Subsequently the Legislature enacted the Kerala Debt Relief Act 1977 which was published in the Kerala Gazette dated 12-8-1977. S.1(3) of the said Act states that the provisions of the Act are to be deemed to have come into force on 13th day of January, 1977. By S.13 of the Act the Kerala Debt Relief Ordinance, 1977 (9 of 1977) is repealed. S.3 of the Act corresponds to S.3 of the repealed Ordinance and contains substantially identical terms. But the definition of the expression "debtor" contained in clause (4) of S.2 of the Act is materially different from the corresponding definition that was contained in clause (6) of S.2 of the Ordinance. Under S.2(6) of the Ordinance any person whose annual income did not exceed two thousand and four hundred rupees, from whom any debt is due was to be regarded as a "debtor" so lung as he did not fall within the excepted categories mentioned in sub clauses (i) to (iii). Under Clause.4 of S.2 of the Act the expression "debtor" has been defined as follows: