A VENKATARAMA AYYAR Vs. ARSRINIVASA SASTRIGAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal arises out of an application made in the Court of the Subordinate Judge of Kumbakonam under the rules made under the Madras Agriculturists Relief Act for a declaration that a sum of Rs. 3,914-11-0 only is due from the applicant, respondent herein, under a mortgage executed by him in favour of the appellant's father for Rs. 10,000 in 1931. The Court below scaled down the debt to a sum of Rs. 5,814-11-2, and the creditors have brought this appeal.

(2.) Mr. Seshagiri Sastri, earned Counsel for the respondent, has raised a preliminary objection that an appeal from the order of the lower Court lay under Section 13 of the Madras Civil Courts Act to the District Court in the first instance, and that the appeal preferred directly to this Court is not maintainable. Section 13, so far as it is material here, runs as follows: Appeals from the decrees and orders of Subordinate Judges and District Munsiffs shall, when such appeals are allowed by law he to the District Court except when the amount or value of the subject-matter of the suit exceeds Rs. 5,000 in which case the appeal shall lie to the High Court.

(3.) It is argued that under this provision all appeals from decrees or orders of Subordinate Judges lie to the District Court unless the case falls within the exception, and as the exception covers only suits and not applications it is not applicable here. We are unable to agree with this contention. Rule 9 of the rules already referred to provides that, The order of the Court declaring the amount of the debt under Rule 7, shall be subject to appeal and second appeal as if it were a decree in an original suit.