(1.) THE first defendant's claim that she is entitled to the benefits of the Kerala Agriculturists' Debt Relief Act (Act XXXI of 1958), has given rise to this appeal. Her application under that Act was opposed by the decree-holder on several grounds. Some of the objections raised by the decree-holder were heard as preliminary points and the execution Court overruled those objections. THE correctness of the order of the execution Court overruling these objections has been challenged by the decree-holder in the present appeal.
(2.) WHEN the appeal came up for hearing, two points were raised on behalf of the decree-holder appellant and these are (1) the amount of mesne profits due from the first defendant is not a debt as defined in the kerala Agriculturists' Debt Relief Act and (2) the liability of the first defendant is one arising oat of a breach of trust and that such liability is excluded from the scope of the Agriculturists' Debt Relief Act.
(3.) THE question whether the first defendant is an agriculturist as defined in the Kerala Agriculturists' Debt Relief Act, does not appear to have been considered by the lower court. That matter has also to be considered along with the other outstanding points raised by the decree-holder before final orders are passed on the application put in by the first defendant. Subject to this direction, this appeal is dismissed with costs. Dismissed.