DAYARAM KISHANDAS KURMI Vs. MANNULAL SHEODIN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is an appeal by the judgment debtors, to set aside the order, dated 10th January 1946, passed by the Additional District Judge, Hoshangabad, in Civil Appeal No. 14-B of 1945, affirming the order, dated 17th February 1945, passed by the Court of the Subordinate Judge. Second Class, Hoshangabed, in execution, holding that the application made by the judgment debtors was false and frivolous.

(2.) THE judgment-debtors (appellants before me) were indebted to the decree-holders (respondents hero) and the debt that the former owed to the latter was settled by the Debt Relief Court, Hoshangabad, and that Court passed an order that it be paid in annual instalments on or before the 15th of June each year. It is the ease of the decree-holders that two consecutive instalments which were payable on 15th June 1942 and 15th June 1943 respectively were defaulted by the judgment debtors and in consequence of these defaults in payment, the Deputy Commissioner ordered, under Section 13(3), Relief of Indebtedness Act, that the order of the Debt Relief Court fixing the instalments ceased to have effect and the amount outstanding should be recoverable, as if a final decree has been passed by a Court of civil jurisdiction. This order of the Deputy Com-missioner was sought to be executed as a decree in a civil Court but was opposed by the judgment debtor's, on the ground that no two consecutive instalments did in fact remain in arrears and consequently the Deputy Commissioner's order was without jurisdiction. It was contended by the judgment-debtors that there was remission of half the rent for the year 1941-42 and as a result thereof the instalment that was payable on 15th June 1912 was suspended, under Section 12(2), Relief of Indebtedness Act. This was negatived by the executing Court and it also refused to go behind the order passed by the Deputy Commissioner. It is against this order that an appeal was preferred to the District Court, Hoshangabad, which affirmed the order of the executing Court and dismissed the appeal. This second appeal has now been preferred.

(3.) THE next question is whether this remission for the year 1941-42 can attract the provisions of Section 12(2), Relief of Indebtedness Act, so as to cause suspension of the instalment, that was payable on 15th June. The learned Judge of the lower appellate Court has held that, inasmuch as the agricultural year 1941-42 ended on 1st May 1942 and inasmuch as the remission of the rent related to that year, that would not entitle the judgment-debtors to claim any suspension in respect of the instalment that was payable on 15th June, the reason assigned being that there was no remission of the rent for the year 1942-43. I am not prepared to accept this reason as sound and correct, for the simple reason that the instalment that was payable on 15th June was undoubtedly to come out of the agricultural income that the judgment-debtors could possibly derive from their agricultural lands at the end of the agricultural year, namely, May 1942. According to the general scheme of the C.P. and Berar Relief of Indebtedness Act, it seems to me that the intention of the Legislature was to enable the debtors, who were agriculturists to pay up the instalments, conveniently at a time, which followed immediately at the end of the agricultural year after the harvest. Therefore, in my view, it is quite clear that the instalment that was payable on 15th June became suspended under the provisions of Section 12(2), C.P. and Barer Relief of Indebtedness Act, when there was remission of the rent for the year 1941-42. The result, therefore, is that there was no default of payment of two consecutive instalments, when the Deputy Commissioner's order was actually passed directing that the amount due had become exigible and could be recovered in execution of a decree. In these circumstances there is no doubt whatsoever in my mind that the order of the Deputy Commissioner which is being sought to be executed as a decree in a civil Court was without jurisdiction.