A L S P P L SUBRAMANIAN CHETTIAR BY AGENT NARAYANAN CHETTIAR Vs. MUTHUSWAMI GOUNDAN ALIAS AVANASHI GOUNDAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an application for leave to appeal to the Federal Court from an order of Wadsworth, J., which involves a substantial question of law as to the interpretation of the Government of India Act, 1935. The application is opposed and it is necessary to set out the course of events preceding the order of the learned Judge and to examine the provisions of the Act and the amendments which have been made to the Civil P. C. by the Government of India (Adaptation of Indian Laws) Order, 1937.

(2.) On the 21 November, 1934, the petitioner obtained a money decree for Rs. 7,569-0-9 with interest and costs against the respondent in the Court of the Subordinate Judge of Coimbatore. At that time the Madras Agriculturists Relief Act had not been placed on the statute book. It came into force, however, on the 22nd March, 1938, and in accordance with its provisions the judgment-debtor applied for an order scaling down the decretal amount. His application was granted and as the result of the investigation it was found that taking into-account the scaling down provisions the debt had been completely discharged. Consequently the judgment-debtor applied to the Subordinate Judge for an order directing full satisfaction to be recorded and this application was granted. The petitioner then applied to this Court to revise the Subordinate Judge's order on the ground that the Madras Agriculturists Relief Act was ultra vires the powers of the Provincial Legislature and to set aside the order for scaling down and the order directing satisfaction to be recorded.

(3.) The application for revision came before Wadsworth, J., on the 2nd May, 1939. By that time the question of the validity of the Madras Agriculturists Relief Act had been considered by a Full Bench of this Court in Mada Nagarathnam v. Puvvada Seshayya (1939) 1 M.L.J. 272 : I.L.R. (1939) Mad. 151 (F.B.). The Full Bench held that the Act was intra vires the powers of the Provincial Legislature. As he was bound to do in the circumstances, Wadsworth, J., dismissed the revision petition, but as it involved an important question as to the interpretation of the Government of India Act, 1935, he granted a certificate under Section 205(1) of the Act. It is in respect of that order of dismissal that the petitioner wishes to appeal to the Federal Court. The respondent says there is no appeal from the order of a single Judge of a High Court and in this connection relies on the provisions of Section 111(a) of the Civil P. C.. An examination of that section fails to reveal any support for the argument.