Skip to content


Balchand Chaturchand Vs. Chunilal Jagjivandas - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectCivil
CourtMumbai
Decided On
Case NumberFirst Appeal No. 227 of 1912
Judge
Reported in(1913)15BOMLR387; 19Ind.Cas.901
AppellantBalchand Chaturchand
RespondentChunilal Jagjivandas
Excerpt:
dekkhan agriculturists' relief act (xvii of 1879), section 20-decree-agriculturist-instalments-status of agriculturist proved in execution.;it is not competent to a court to grant instalments in execution proceedings against a person who proves therein that he is an agriculturist, for section 20 of the dekkhan agriculturists' belief act does not apply to the case of a person who was not an agriculturist when the decree was obtained whatever his status may be thereafter when execution cores to be taken out against him. - maharashtra scheduled castes, scheduled tribes, de-notified tribes (vimukta jatis), nomadic tribes, other backward classes and special backward category (regulation of issuance and verification of) caste certificate act (23 of 2001), sections 6 & 10: [s.b. mhase, a.p...........agriculturists' relief act to the case of a judgment-debtor who was not an agriculturist when the decree was obtained, but who by discarding trade and limiting himself more exclusively to profits in land had become an agriculturist at the time of the execution. we do not think that he was empowered to do this. there has been a great deal of argument as to the meaning of section 20, in the light of the definition of the word ' agriculturist' in the act, but it seems to us to be quite clear that section 20 cannot apply to the case of a person who was not an agriculturist when the decree was obtained, whatever his status may be thereafter when execution comes to be taken out against him. and therefore as the subordinate judge had no power to make the order which he did, granting.....
Judgment:

Heaton, J.

1. In this case the First Class Subordinate Judge of Nasik has applied Section 20 of the Dekkhan Agriculturists' Relief Act to the case of a judgment-debtor who was not an agriculturist when the decree was obtained, but who by discarding trade and limiting himself more exclusively to profits in land had become an agriculturist at the time of the execution. We do not think that he was empowered to do this. There has been a great deal of argument as to the meaning of Section 20, in the light of the definition of the word ' agriculturist' in the Act, but it seems to us to be quite clear that Section 20 cannot apply to the case of a person who was not an agriculturist when the decree was obtained, whatever his status may be thereafter when execution comes to be taken out against him. And therefore as the Subordinate Judge had no power to make the order which he did, granting instalments, we must set that order aside and direct that the execution proceedings should go on according to law.

2. The appellants must have their costs here and in the Court below.

3. The cross objections by the respondent are dismissed with costs.


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //