VALLABHDAS Vs. SIKANYA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY this petition and the connected petitions (Misc. Petition No. 41 of 1969 and misc. Petition No. 42 of 1969) tinder Article 226 of the Constitution, the petitioners have challenged the vires of Madhya Pradesh Scheduled Tribes Debt Relief regulations, 1962 (hereinafter referred to as the Regulations) and the Madhya pradesh Anusuchit Jan Jati Rini Sahayata Adhiniyam, 1967 (hereinafter referred to as the Adhiniyam) and prayed for a direction that the order of Debt Relief Court constituted under the enactments and the order in revision by the Collector be quashed.

(2.) THE other petitions (Misc. Peti-tion No. 41 of 1969 (Vallabhdas and 3 Ors. v. Dhanna and 3 Ors.) and Misc. Petition No. 42 of 1969 (Vallabhdas and 3 Ors. v. Navalsingh and 3 Ors.) raise substantially the same points and shall be disposed of by this order.

(3.) THE petitioners who are moneylenders advanced some money to Su-kanya who is admittedly a member of the Scheduled Tribe and is residing in a Scheduled area. The respondent Dhanna is also a member of the tribal community and stood surety for Sukanya. A decree was obtained by the petitioners against the respondents Sukanya and Dhanna for money lent to Sukanya. It seems the decree was not executed immediately and when the petitioners tried to execute it through civil Court. Madhya Pradesh Scheduled Tribes Debt Relief Regulations, 1962 came into force. Under the Regulations, "debt" was defined to include even liabilities owing to a creditor payable under a decree or order of a Civil Court. By Regulation 5. all proceedings in execution of a decree stood withdrawn and the Court executing the decree issued directions to the petitioners to submit the claim before the Debt Relief Court. The Debt Relief Court exercising powers under Section 6 of the Regulations opened the transactions and determined the amount payable to the petitioners at Rs. 55. 15. The order of the Debt Relief Court is dated 31-71967. On the date when the order of the Debt Relief Court was made, Madhya pradesh Anusuchit Jan Jati Rini Sahayata Adhiniyam had already come into force. Therefore, the petitioners preferred a revision before the Collector under Section 22 of the Adhiniyam, which the Collector dismissed.