LAWS(BOM)-1975-4-15

PREMCHAND NATHMAL KOTHARI Vs. KISANLAL BACHHARAJ VYAS

Decided On April 05, 1975
PREMCHAND NATHMAL KOTHARI Appellant
V/S
KISANLAL BACHHARAJ VYAS Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) An application was filed under section 3 of the Maharashtra (Vidarbha Region) Agricultural Debtor's Relief Act, 1969 hereinafter referred to as the Act, by creditor Kisanlal Bachharaj Vyas on 1-4-1970 against his debtors. It seems from the record that this application was opposed by the original Non-applicants Nos. 2,3, and 5 to 7 by filing a written statement and contention was also raised that the said application is bared by limitation, as it was not filed before the 1st day of April 1970 . It was also contended that as the application was not filed under Section 3 of the Act before the specified date , the debt stood extinguished. The applicant -creditor has also filed an application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act showing sufficient cause for not filing the application before the 1st day of April 1970.

(2.) The learned Civil Judge, Senior Division Amravati, by his order dated 23rd October 1972 allowed the application filed by the applicant -creditor under Section 5 of the Limitation Act and condoned the delay . Therefore he further held that the debt is not extinguished Against this order the present revision application is filed by the debtors.

(3.) Shri Chandurkar, the learned counsel for the applicant contended before me that though under Section 3 of the Act a date has been specified before which an application is to be filed , it cannot be said that any period of limitation, has been prescribed by the said section within the meaning of Section 29(2) of the Limitation Act, therefore , according to Shri Chandurkar, the provisions of Section 5 of the Limitation Act will have no application to such proceedings. For this proposition he has relied upon a decision of this Court in Shankar v. Chunilal. He further contended that even assuming that a period of limitation has been prescribed, application of the provisions of the Limitation Act , including Section 5 are expressly excluded, In this context he relied upon the provision of Section 13 of the act which lays down the penal consequence if such an application is not filed before the 1st day of he has relied upon a decision of the Supreme Court in Hukumdev v. Lalit Narain.