BAJIRAO DOMAJI SHREERANG Vs. KASHIRAO AJABRAO DESHMUKH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This civil revision raises an interetsing question as to application of the Maharashtra Vidarbha Region Agricultural Debtor's Relief Act, 1969 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Vidarbha Debtor's Relief Act'). The question arises in this way: Applicants 2 to 4 before me obtained decree in Civil Suits Nos. 36B of 1950 and 1455 of 1958 against opponent Kashirao before me (hereinafter referred to as Kashirao). These two decrees, however, could not be executed as the execution of these decrees was stayed on account of the operation of the Madhya Pradesh Temporary Postponement of Execution of Decrees Act, 1956. This Act came into force on 1st Oct. 1956 (sic) (28th March 1956?). After the Reorganization of the States, the Vidarbha Debtor's Relief Act came into force OB the 7th day of March 1969. This was preceded by an Ordinance which was promulgated on 30-1-1969. As we shall presently see the Vidarbha Debtors Relief Act was to provide and substitute in place of the M. P. Temporary Postponement of Execution of Decrees Act, 1956 and the Ordinance in regard to debts due under the decrees of agriculturists in the Vidarbha Region. What was only postponed under the Execution of Decrees Act was, by reason of the application of the Vidarbha Debtor's Relief Act to become converted into an award executable in accordance with the scheme of the Vidarbha Debtor's Relief Act. Applicants Narayanrao, Sulochanabai and Gangabai the decree-holders in the two suits namely, Civil Suits Nos. 36B of 1950 and 1455/58 had assigned their decrees in favour of Bajirao, the present applicant No. 1 on 14th Jan., 1970 by a registered instrument of assignment. The instrument was registered on the 19th of Jan., 1970.

(2.) The Vidarbha Debtor's Relief Act required a creditor upon pain of his debt or decree being wiped out to file an application against his debtors before 1-10-1969 for adjustment of his dues. They are then merged into an award under the scheme of the Act. This date, I am informed, was subsequently extended to 1st April 1970. In other words, every creditor who obtained a decree and whose decree was postponed on account of the M. P. Temporary Postponement of Execution of Decrees Act, 1956 had to make an application prior to 1st April 1970 against his debtor for the purposes of an adjustment of his debts under the decree. If he failed to do so, then under Section 13 of the Vidarbha Debtor's Act the debt due from the debtor shall become extinguished under that section. The applicants 2 to 4 before me made an application under the Vidarbha Debtors Relief Act on 30-3-1970. While this application was pending Bajirao filed another application on 19th June 1970 by which he prayed that he is the assignee of the decree passed in favour of Narayan, Sulochanabai and Gangabai. To this application he joined Kashirao as a party and styled this application as being one under Order. 21, Rule. 16, read with Section 151 of the Civil P. C. He contended that both these decrees were assigned in his favour and the decrees have also been transferred for execution to the Civil Judge, Junior Division, Ka-tol. He claimed that by reason of the assignment he was entitled to execute the decree and. therefore, he should be substituted in place of the applicants 2 to 4-- Assignors and the proceedings be allowed to proceed further. This application was filed on 19th of June 1970 i. e. beyond 1st April 1970.

(3.) This application was dismissed by the learned trial Judge, holding that the assignee was not entitled to file an application since the date for filing of an application by a decree-holder was already over, the application being beyond 1st April 1970. And since on the date of the application filed by Narayan, Sulochanabai and Gangabai on 30th of March 1970, the applicants had already assigned or transferred their right in favour of Bajirao, their application D/-30-3-70 was also not tenable. In view of this, therefore, the learned Judge rejected both the main application as well as Exhibit 12 by which Bajirao had sought to substitute himself in place of Narayan, Sulochana and Gangabai.