LAWS(MAD)-1951-11-3

KALLURI KRISHNAYYA Vs. POTTI VENKATA SUBBARAYUDU

Decided On November 21, 1951
KALLURI KRISHNAYYA Appellant
V/S
POTTI VENKATA SUBBARAYUDU Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This second appeal raises a question in regard to the applicability of Section 9 of the Madras Agriculturists' Relief Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act) to debts incurred after the Act came into force.

(2.) The facts are simple and are not in dispute. The defendant executed a promissory note Ex. P. 1 dated 5-1-1943 in favour of the plaintiff for a sum of Rs. 1024-6-0. The prior promissory notes, which culminated in Ex. P. 1, are as follows : Ex. P. 2, dated 7-1-1940. Ex. P. 3, dated 9-1-1937. Ex. P. 4, dated 11-1-1934.

(3.) The consideration for the earliest promissory note was Rs. 500. It will be seen from the aforesaid dates that the original debt was contracted after 1st October 1932 and that ,Exs. P. 1 and P. 2 were executed subsequent to the Act, i.e., 22-3-1938. The plaintiff filed O. S. No. 22 of 1946 on the file of the Court of the District Munsif, Ongole, for recovery of a sum of Rs. 1024-6-0 due under the promissory note Ex. P. 1 with subsequent interest at 9 per cent per annum. The defendant pleaded that he is an agriculturist and that the debt should be scaled down under the Act. He also contended that though Exs. P. 1 and P. 2 were executed subsequent to the Act, they were so executed under an arrangement between the parties that at the time of the settlement of the suit, the debt should be ascertained according to the Act and that the renewals were made only for the purpose of acknowledgment of the debt. The learned District Munsif held that the agreement pleaded was not true but that the promissory notes executed subsequent to the Act were not supported by consideration. Ho found, after giving credit to the amounts paid, that the plaintiff would be entitled to a decree for a sum of Rs. 333 and subsequent interest from 9-9- 1944 at 6 1/4 per cent per annum. In appeal, the learned Subordinate Judge held that the plaintiff would be entitled to a decree on the basis of Ex. P. 1 and, after giving credit to the amounts paid, he gave a decree for a sum of Rs. 656- 13-8 with subsequent interest at the rate of 6i per cent per annum. The defendant preferred the above second appeal.