JAWAHARLAL Vs. RAMESHCHANDER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant before us is the decree-holder and seeks to vacate an order of the Jagirdars Debt Settlement Board, whereby the respondent has been held to be a debtor and therefore the decree liable to be adjusted under the provisions of the Hyderabad Jagirdars Debt Settlement Act. On June 27, 1953, the respondent, Rai Rameshchand, filed an application under the Act, claiming that the appellant had a decree of the City Civil Court against him and that decree should be adjusted under section 28 of the Jagirdars Debt Settlement Act. The judgment-creditor denied the applicant to be a jagirdar and therefore the Board's having jurisdiction to entertain the application. In the application, the amount due under the decree is stated to be Rs. 10,200. The Board enquired into the two issues of whether the applicant was the debtor and whether the total amount of debts exceeds Rs. 5,000. Both the issues have been held in favour of the respondent. Hence this appeal.

(2.) In order to appreciate the several arguments urged before us, it is necessary to state the relevant provisions of the Act under which the application was filed. By section 1 of the Hyderabad Jagirdars Debt Settlement Act (XII of 1952) F.A. No. 2/1 of 1955. 12th November, 1959.

(3.) It is clear that the definition of ' debtor ' has importance for purposes of making the application and also for purposes of ascertaining -whether the Board has jurisdiction to entertain it. That word has been defined in section 2 (e) as follows :-