V SESHAMNA Vs. TALIVELA BASAVAIAH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These revision petitions arise out of the suits filed in S. C. Nos. 41 of 1978 and 129 of 1977 for recovery of the amounts. The father of the defendant borrowed the amounts on promissory notes from the plaintiff's transferor. The plaintiff is the holder in due course for consideration upon transfer of pronotes in her favour and as the defendant failed to pay the amounts, the suits were filed. The plea in the written statements in both the suits is identical. It is stated that the pronotes are forged and they are not supported by consideration and in any event the defendant is a small former owning Ac. 0.50 of wet land and eligible for benefits under Andhra Pradesh Agricultural Indebtedness (Relief) Act (VII of 1977) and as such the debts must be deemed to have been discharged. The plaintiff also claimed that she is a small former and as such the defendant is precluded from claiming the benefits under the Act. The Court below held that pronotes are true and the plaintiff is a bona fide holder in due course or valuable consideration. It is further held that the plaintiff is not a small farmer and the defendant is a small farmer eligible to the benefits under Act VII of 1977 and in this view the suits are dismissed.

(2.) The learned Counsel for the petitioners confined himself to the contention that a special connotation is given to the 'creditor' under Act VII of 1977 by defining the same and the debt due to such creditor only is deemed to be discharged and the plaintiff the holder in due course cannot be considered as a creditor within the meaning of the Act and as such the defendant is not eligible for the benefits under the Act. The learned Counsel fcr the respondent advanced two fold contentions namely that the benefit is available provided the requirements of 'debt' and 'debtor' are satisfied without reference to the creditor and in any event the holder in due course is within the ambit of the creditor postulated in the Act. .

(3.) Section 4 of Act VII of 1977 provides that every debt due by a small farmer to any creditor shall stand discharged subject to the provisions contained in the Act. This is a three dimension position prescribing occupational qualification for the claimant from whom the debt is due to a creditor, All the three expressions namely shall farmer, debt and creditor take colour from the connotations given under the Act and the consideration for eligibility to relief is circumscribed by the width of the said expressions, The 'creditor's is defined in section 3 (h) as follows :-