LAWS(GJH)-1990-9-17

PANCHAL GORDHANDAS RANCHHODBHAI Vs. MOCHI SHANTILAL HARGOVANDAS

Decided On September 07, 1990
PANCHAL GORDHANDAS RANCHHODBHAI Appellant
V/S
Mochi Shantilal Hargorvandas And Another Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) A short but interesting question of law arises in the present petition as to whether the provisions of Section 27 of the Gujarat Rural Debtors' Relief Act, 1976 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act") would be applicable in the present case.

(2.) The short facts giving rise to the present petition are that the petitioner -firm which was holding a licence of money -lending, advanced a loan of Rs. 6000/ - on July 22, 1975 to the first respondent who was Mochi by caste for the purpose of business of shoe -making at Jambusar. He executed a promissory note in favour of the petitioner -firm, but did not repay the amount and the petitioner was constrained to file Civil Suit at Jambusar wherein ultimately a compromise decree was passed on August 10, 1977 for Rs. 5000/ - which were required to be paid by the first respondent in four equal installments of Rs 1250/ - each. The first respondent paid the first installment of Rs. 1250/ - on 1st June 1978 but thereafter he did not pay any amount. Meanwhile on March 9, 1977, he filed an Application under Section 6 of the Act before the Debt Settlement Officer stating therein that he is a debtor within the meaning of Section 2 (D) of the Act and that he should be discharged from the payment of the debt. The Debt Settlement Officer, Jambusar, District Bharuch vide his order dated July 13, 1979 allowed the application and held that the applicant -first respondent herein can be said to be - Rural Labourer" within the meaning of the Act, and therefore, in accordance with the provision of the Act, the entire debt is required to be discharged. Against the said order the present petitioner preferred appeal before the Appellate Officer and District Registrar, Co -operative Societies (Rural Debts) being Appeal No. 1962 of 1979 and the Appellate Authority dismissed the said appeal and confirmed the order passed by the Debt Settlement Officer. The said order is challenged by filing the present petition.

(3.) xxx xxx xxx xxx