WAMAN Vs. BALDEVDAS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE respondent as plaintiff filed a Civil Suit No. 8-B/91 in the Court of Civil Judge, Class-I, Burhanpur for recovery of a sum of Rs. 10,375/ -. It was pleaded in the plaint that the plaintiff had advanced a loan of Rs. 6,000/- to the defendant and the said amount was to carry interest at the rate of 2 % per month. It was further put forth in the plaint that the defendant had executed a promissory note in respect of the amount in question. As the defendant failed to pay the loan a notice was served on him and when no response came the suit was filed. The petitioner, did not contest the suit and eventually an ex parte decree was passed against him. The respondent sought to execute the decree in execution proceeding. In the decree a petition was filed under Section 47 of the Code of Civil Procedure contending, inter alia, that the decree passed by the concerned Court is a nullity in as much as it is hit by Section 14 of the Madhya Pradesh Samaj Ke Kamjor Vargon Ke Krishi Sambandhi Bhumi Dharkon Ka Udhar Dene Walon Ke Bhumi Hadpane Sambandhi Kuchakron Se Paritran Tatha Mukti Adhiniyam, 1976 (hereinafter referred to as 'ad-hiniyam 1976') and Section 7, of the M. P. Gramin Rin Vimukti Adhiniyam, 1982 (in short 'adhiniyam 1982' ). The executing Court considered the objections raised by the defendant and came to hold that the defendant had not contested the suit to come within exceptions carved out in the aforesaid statutes and accordingly the execution was bound to proceed.

(2.) I have heard Mr. Neeraj Vegad, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Hemant Chouhan, learned counsel for the respondent.

(3.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioner has referred to Sections 2 (f), 12 and 14 of the Adhiniyam, 1976. It is apposite to refer the said provisions: