DHANNA Vs. CHAMPALAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE only question involved in second appeal is whether the appellant-defendant is a marginal farmer under M. P. Gramin Rin Vimukti Tatha Rin Sthagan Adhiniyam, 1975 (hereinafter called as Adhiniyam ). If he is a marginal farmer under that Act, then the consequences of Section 4 of that Act are to ensue on commencement of Act. One of the consequences is that every debt advanced before the commencement of this Act, including the amount of interest payable by him, to a creditor, shall be deemed to be wholly discharged and no Civil Court will have jurisdiction to entertain the suit or proceedings against recovery of debt. Even execution proceedings, if the matter is at that stage, shall stand withdrawn, the debtor shall be released of all the debts. The suits and other proceedings shall abate.

(2.) THE marginal farmer under this Act is defined as under :-

(3.) APPELLANT-DEFENDANT's plea is that he was a marginal farmer holding less than half hectare of land. The trial Court concluded that it was not proved as to how much land he had on the date of coming into force of this Adhiniyam. As against this, the first appellate Court said that although his holding was less than half hectare but he had not said that he was personally cultivating the land, and, therefore, he was not covered by the term 'marginal farmer' as there should be two conditions, (i) holding agricultural land not exceeding half hectare, (ii) personally cultivating such land.