KASI VISWANATHAM Vs. VENKATA SUBBA RAO

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In D. Nanja Reddy vs. D. Anjaneyulul Chennakesav Reddi, J, held;

(2.) The legal point that is involved in the reference is whether the 'debtors' are deprived of the protection conferred by the A. P. Agricultural Indebtedness Relief Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), by the principles of constructive res judicata.

(3.) This position can be said to arise in the following circumstances. A suit is filed by the creditor for the recovery of the debt after the Act came into force, and exparte decree is granted. No allegation is made in the plaint that the defendant is the 'debtor' within the meaning of the Act. Further, even if any such allegation is made, no issue is framed nor any evidence is let in and much less any finding is arrived at that the defendant is not the 'debtor'. After the ex parte decree being granted, when the execution proceedings were initiated, it is at that stage the judgment debtor raises the objection that the decree stands abated as he is a 'debtor' within the meaning of the Act. The question, therefore, that arises is, whether the creditor can successfully invoke the doctrine of constructive res judicata and bar the judgment-debtor from raising the plea of 'debtor', in which case the debt will be deemed to have been discharged.