T S KOTHANDRAMAN Vs. SUB-COLLECTORMETTUR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners herein have prayed for the issue of a writ of certiorari to quash the order of the first respondent Dt. 8th Sept., 1981 allowing the second respondent's appeal and setting aside the order of the Special Tahsildar, Debt Relief, Mettur Dt, 31st Oct., 1980 holding that the petitioners are entitled to the benefits of Tamil Nadu Act 13 of 1980.

(2.) The petitioners herein have taken a mortgage loan of Rs. 20,000/- from the second respondent on 8th April, 1974 and the said mortgage debt was outstanding on the date of the commencement of Tamil Nadu Act 13 of 1980. Taking advantage of the provisions of the said Act, the petitioners filed an application under S. 6 of the said Act before the Special Tahsildar (Debt Relief) Mettur for a certificate of redemption alleging that their annual household income is less than Rs. 4,800/- and that therefore they are entitled to the benefits of the Act. The said application was opposed by the second respondent on the ground that the petitioner's annual household income was more than Rs. 4,800/-. The Special Tahsildar, by his order Dtt. 31st October, 1980 found that the annual household income of the petitioners does not exceed Rs. 4,800/ and therefore they are entitled to a certificate of redemption. By the same order he also directed an unsecured debt of Rs. 7,500/- due by the petitioners to the second respondent on a promissory note to stand discharged.

(3.) There was an appeal by the second respondent to the first respondent herein against the said order of the Special Tahsildar. When the said appeal was pending, the definition of 'debtor' under S. 3(d) stood amended by the Tamil Nadu Act 10 of 1981. By this amendment, a proviso has been introduced to S. 3 (d) excluding certain persons from the definition of debtors. The provisos (i) to (iv) are not relevant in this case. The provisos (v), (vi) and (vii) are relevant for the purpose of the present discussion and those provisos are extracted below: