KAMLU AMRITA MARATHE Vs. EKNATH ANANDA MARATHE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE main contention raised in this appeal revives a matter which has been settled-by three Judges of this Court in three separate cases regarding the interpretation of certain, sections of the Relief of Indebtedness Act. The facts are as follows.

(2.) THE appeal is by the judgment-debtor; He executed a mortgage on 2-11-1926 in favour of the decree-holder, respondent. The decree-holder filed civil Suit No. 862-A of 1940 on the basia of this mortgage in the Civil Court. On 15-10-1940, while the suit was pending, the judgment-debtor (mortgagor) applied to the Debt Belief Court for a scheme. The claim of Rs. 1340-4-0 made in the Civil Court was scaled down to Rs. 1226-0-0 by the Debt Belief Court on 26-11-1941. This sum was made payable in 25 instalments, the first 24 being of Rs. 50-0-0 each and the last of Rs. 260-0-0. Two instalments were defaulted, an accordingly the decree-holder applied to the Deputy Commissioner under Section 18(3), Relief of Indebtedness Act for a certificate. The certificate was granted on l2-9-l94l. Accordingly, the decree holder filed' the application out of which this appeal arises seeking execution and asking: for possession of the property. The application, was made on 11-10-1944.

(3.) THIS contention was overruled by the lower Court, and the learned Judge directed the decree-holder to be placed in possession. An appeal to the lower appellate Court against this failed, and accordingly a second appeal was filed here. This is the appeal I am now hearing. An order for stay was obtained on 24-4-1945, and shortly afterwards, on 1-5-1945, the judgment-debtor deposited the whole of the balance due under the Debt Belief Court's order into Court. It is contended that this completely satisfies the decree-holder's claim, and accordingly the order directing possession to be delivered to the decree. holder should be reversed.