EKANATHASAMIDURAI Vs. PERIYASAMIDURAI PATCHALA NAINAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS second appeal has been filed against the judgment and decree of the Subordinate Judge, Ponneri, dated 10.01.2007, made in A.S.No.10 of 2006, reversing the judgment and decree of the learned District Munsif, Panruti, made in O.S.No.421 of 1995, dated 27.01.2006.

(2.) FOR the sake of convenience, the parties in the appeal are referred to as they have been arrayed in the suit in O.S.No.421 of 1995.

(3.) IN the written statement filed on behalf of the first defendant, the claims made by the plaintiffs have been denied. It has been stated that the plaintiffs are not agriculturists as contemplated by Acts 40 of 1979, 8 of 1973 and 4 of 1938. The plaintiffs are hailing from a royal family and they are owning large extent of lands. They are also income tax assessee and therefore, they are not entitled to the benefits of the Debt Relief Act. Since the plaintiffs have accepted to pay the amount as fixed by this Court the present suit is not maintainable. The plaintiffs ought to have deposited the amount at the time of filing of the suit. Further, the plaintiffs are not entitled to extension of limitation period as claimed by them, since they are not agriculturists as contemplated by law. The plaintiffs are liable to pay Court fee for the entire mortgaged amount. Since 1/4th of the Court fees had been paid, the suit is liable to be dismissed. Since, there is no cause of auction for the plaintiffs to file the suit they are not entitled to the reliefs prayed for by them.