DADIBA P ARSIWALLA Vs. THAKUJI RAMJI GAEKWAD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS application for a stay of the suit is made under Section 73 of the Bombay Agricultural Debtors Relief Act (Bom. XXVIII of 1939). THIS suit was filed by the plaintiff in 1941 and as the defendant contended that he was an agriculturist within the meaning of the Dekkhan Agriculturists' Relief Act, according to the practice of our Court, the question of ascertaining his income from agricultural and non-agricultural sources for three years prior to the date of the suit was referred to the Commissioner, on May 19, 1941. Seventeen months have elapsed but the report has not yet been made. I am told that while the evidence was going on before the Commissioner, the defendant on June 2, 1942, made an application to the Debt Adjustment Board for Khed taluka appointed by the Provincial Government by Notifications Nos. 3791 and 3791-A dated December 23, 1941. He thereafter applied to the Commissioner for stay of proceedings, and as this was the first application made under the Act, the Commissioner cancelled several meetings fixed before him in July last. The defendant took out this notice of motion on July 29 for stay of all proceedings before the Commissioner and for a transfer of the suit to the Debt Adjustment Board at Khed.

(2.) THE defendant's argument is that under Section 35 of the Act the jurisdiction to inquire whether he is a debtor and whether his debts do not exceed Rs. 15,000 are matters to be investigated by the Board, and immediately the Court is informed that such an application has been made under Section 17 of the Act, the Court must under Section 73 stop all proceedings in the pending suit. It is argued that the jurisdiction of the Court has come to an end by reason of Section 73 of the Act.