K RAMAIAH Vs. D V RAMANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The revision petitioners, the first petitioner being the father of the second, are the judgment-debtors in E.P.No.25 of 1992 in which they raised a plea of the decree being nullity and not executable against them, as they are small farmers entitled to the protection of the A.P. Agricultural Indebtedness (Relief) Act, 1977, Act 7 of 1977 (hereinafter referred to as the Act). The plea having been negatived after considering the evidence led in the proceedings, the present revision has been filed.

(2.) The submission of the learned counsel for the petitioners is that the order of the learned Munsif suffers from material irregularity inasmuch as he has perversed himself in not deciding the issues in question but has held the, petitioners to be not small farmers only because, he held, they maintained a Hero Honda Motor Cycle, and that in another suit filed by the brother of the judgment holder, they had not taken the plea of being small farmers.

(3.) The respondent decree-holder brought O.S.No.124/86, against the petitioners as defendants Nos. 1 and 2 and one J. Venkata Ramana as defendant No3 for recovery of a sum of Rs.7,320/-representing principal and interest due on the mortgage executed on 10-6-1974 by the petitioners in favour of him.The third defendant was the purchaser of the property.The petitioners even though appeared and filed written statement and issues were framed to the suit, yet they absented themselves. The suit was contested by the third defendant and was decreed ex parte against the petitioners. Execution being levied, the plea of protection under the Act was raised in defence.