NANDA Vs. THE DISTRICT JUDGE AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS writ petition of petitioner Nanda arises out of the following circumstances.

(2.) AN application under Section 6 of the Rajasthan Relief of Agricultural Indebtedness Act, 1957 (hereinafter called the Act) was filed by creditor Kanhaiyalal. husband of respondent No. 3 Smt. Gulab Devi, in the court of Civil Judge, Jaipur District, Jaipur, alleging that Rs. 4, 500/ - were advanced by the creditor by way of loan to petitioner Nanda on the basis of a pronote and a receipt executed by the debtor in favour of the creditor and as the debtor was an agriculturist, therefore, it was prayed that the loan advanced to Nanda may be determined under the provisions of the Act. Petitioner Nanda denied to have received any loan from Kanhaiyalal and executed any pronote in favour of the creditor. The Debt Relief Court after recording the statements of the creditor -Kanhaiyalal and the scribe Shivdayal and also examining the witnesses produced by the debtor came to the conclusion that debtor Nanda did not receive any loan by executing the pronote or the receipt in favour of creditor Kanhaiyalal and therefore, it dismissed the application filed by Kanhaiyalal.

(3.) LEARNED Counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent has argued that the judgment of the learned District Judge is a well -reasoned judgment and the evidence produced by the debtor before the Debt Relief Court has been rightly rejected by the said court which the learned District Judge had the power to do while exercising his revisional jurisdiction under Section 17 of the Act; the inference, therefore, drawn by the learned District Judge cannot be said to be perverse and this Court in the exercise of its extraordinary jurisdiction should not interfere with the judgment of the revisional court.