MOINUDDIN AHMED Vs. AITA PEDDA PULLIAH SETTY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The revision petitioner is the defendant, and seeks to revise the order by the lower Court of April 24, 1959, dismissing his petition of April 20, 1959. That petition had asked for the transfer of the case under the Hyderabad Agricultural Debtors Relief Act (XVI of 1956), to the Court specified in section 2(4) of the Act. A suit is pending in the lower Court against the revision petitioner on the basis of a promissory note, and the claim has been put at Rs. 3,700.

(2.) It appears that the aforesaid suit was at one time pending before the Subordinate Judge at Mahbubnagar, but was transferred to the Munsif-Magistrate's Court, Alampur, on grounds of the pecuniary value of the case being less than what the Subordinate Judge has been authorised to try. By the application, the revision petitioner has claimed that he was an agriculturist, his total debts including what was being claimed in the suit have amounted to Rs. 4,798-2-2 (O.S.) and therefore the case should be transferred under section 19(1) of the Act. The application has been rejected on two grounds, the first being that the transfer had not been asked for in the written statement and there was already an issue in the case concerning jurisdiction which would be decided after evidence has been adduced. The next ground is that a similar application has been dismissed on merits earlier.

(3.) It would be of advantage to refer to some of the provisions of the Act under which the revision petitioner claims the transfer. The enactment had come into operation after 90 days of its publication in the Gazette, which was in July, 1956 and its section 4 provides, within three months from the commencement of the Act, for an application by the debtor or his creditor for the adjustment of the debts due from agriculturist by the Court defined in section 2 (4). Section 15 provides for the service of notice on receipt of the application requiring all creditors to submit statements in the prescribed form within one month f om the date of the service of the notice. Thereafter section 18 directs the Court to try the following two issues :- "1. Whether the person for the adjustment of whose debt the application has been made is a debtor, and 1 2. Whether the total amounts of debt due from such person on the date of the application exceeds Rs.15,000."