KALI GOVINDAN Vs. KPANNAMALAI CHETTI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) NO doubt the decision on which the lower Court relies has been overruled by the Bench which decided Palani Goundan V/s. Peria Goundan . But there is a further objection to the maintainability of the application. Petitioner purchased the property bound by the decree only in May, 1940. When Madras Act IV of 1938 came into force he was not a debtor at all and there can be no question of calling in aid Section 19 to apply Secs.8 and 9 to the debt as if it was a debt falling under either of those sections. I say nothing about what would be the result if the mortgagor got the decree scaled down on his own application. The petition is dismissed with costs.