KARMAM SWAMI RAO Vs. KURNOOL SANSKRUTH VIDYADANA SAMAJAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision petition has been referred to a Full Bench by our learned brothers Basi Reddy and Gopal Rao Ekbote. JJ. as raising the following two important questions for determination, viz. 1. Whether a Society registered under the Societies Registration Act (XXI of 1860) is a corporation? And 2. If the answer is in the affirmative, whether it is a corporation formed in pursuance of a special Indian Law? Initially the revision petition came up for hearing before Manohar Pershad. J. (as he then was), before whom it was contended that the lower court was wrongs in relying on Rukminamma v. Venkata Ramdas. 1940-2 Mad LJ 554 = (AIR 1940 Mad 949) distinguishing the case of Bank of Bapatla v. Manvam Bibi. 1954-2 Mad LJ (Andh) 215 which contention according to the learned Judge though devoid of sufficient force, nonetheless, having regard to the divergence of opinion was sufficiently important to be referred to a Bench,

(2.) The relevant provisions of the Madras Agriculturists (herein after referred to as the Act) Relief Act (IV of 1938) upon which the determination of the questions referred to UK would depend, are Sections 4 and 10, which we give below:

(3.) It may not be out of place to say that this Act was enacted with the object of relieving an agricultural debtor of his impecunious condition brought about by the groaning debts and to rehabilitate agriculture which is the basic industry in that State But while the legislature enacted the Act with that object, nonetheless it took care to keep out of purview of that Act certain transactions and certain payments, debts and liabilities due to the Government, whether of the State or the Centre, local authority, co-operative societies including Land Mortgage Bank, etc. It has, under Section 10, also made the provisions of Sections 8 and 9, (under which past debts can be reopened, reappropriated and re-adjusted) inapplicable to certain persons, transactions and liabilities.