D V RANGAIAH Vs. SUB COLLECTOR NANDYAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner, Diyyala Venkata Rangaiah is a money lender of Nandyal. According to the counter affidavit filed by the Sub-Collector, Nandyal, Venkata Rangaiah is a pawn-broker, but be has no licence under the Pawn-brokers Act, 1943. K. Subbarayudu, a harijan and 5 others of Pellavaram village who are agricultural labourers and artisans filed petitions before the Tahsildar under the Andhra Pradesh Agricultural Indebtedness Relief Act, 1977 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) stating that they had borrowed some moneys from the petitioner and pledged gold and silver jewels and cart wheels with him. During the course of the enquirv in those petitions, the Circle Inspector of Police, Nandyal on the direction of the Tribunal searched the house of the petitioner in order to recover the pledged articles. He did not recover any articles but he found 56 promissory notes. The Circle Inspector left the promissory notes with the petitioner obtaining an undertaking from him that he would produce them whenever called upon to do so by the tribunal. But the petitioner did not produce the promissory notes or pledged articles though sent for by the Tribunal. The Tribunal passed the judgment in M.P. No. 1 of 1977 dated 6-1-1978 discharging the debts of the petitioners therein and ordering the return of the pledged articles to them.

(2.) Questioning that judgment, the petitioner filed an appeal before the Sub-Collector, Nandyal, the Appellate Tribunal, against three debtors only viz, Vadla Ramaiab, Vadla Subbaiah and Vadla Brahmaiah. He did not file any appeal with regard to the remaining debtors. He did not also produce the pledged articles of the debtors viz. cart wheels. The Appellate Tribunal in the course of the enquiry directed the peitioner to produce all the 56 pro- missory notes and pledged articles but he failed to produce them. After due enquiry, the Appellate Tribunal dismissed the appeal with costs confirming the judgment of the Lower Tribunal.

(3.) While so, some more harijans from Gollavaram village viz., Datla Ramanna, Setti Bala Venkata and Datla Venkatanna filed the petitions before the Sub-Collector alleging that the petitioner was harassing them for repayment of the debt amounts. They deposed before the Sub-Collector that they bad taken loans, pledged jewellery and also gave paddy and the petitioner instead of returning the pledged articles, got the promissory notes renewed and also obtained decrees from Civil Court. In addition, he was also forcing some of them to vacate their houses and lands. Therefore, they requested that relief might be given to them and they might be saved from the clutches of the petitioner.