BHURAMAL RAMKARAN SHARMA Vs. GULBCHAND SHANKARLAL JAIN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) INSPITE of the fact that the present petition is pending for admission since 1997, learned counsel for the petitioner once again sought for an adjournment. A perusal of the record indicates that a large number of adjournments were sought in the past for the purpose of carrying out amendments to the petition and/or for some other irrelevant reasons. In view of this position, we are constrained to reject a further application for adjournment in the matter.

(2.) THE present petition is challenging an order dated 4th September, 1996 passed by the Tahsildar under the provisions of the Maharashtra Debt Relief Act, 1975. A few but, glaring facts of the present case which indicates the ingenuity of the lawyers utilising the provisions which are made for protection of under-privileged class of the citizens are set hereinafter.

(3.) THE provisions of the maharashtra Debt Relief Act, 1975 (hereinafter referred to as 'the said Act') was enacted with a view to grant immediate urgent debt relief to that segment of the society which were exploited by the money lenders. These provisions of the said Act are in fact meant for the people below poverty line. The statement of Objects and Reasons of the provisions of the Maharashtra Debt Relief Act, 1975 which are published in Maharashtra government Gazette part 5 page 816 inter alia read as under: