The main legal point established in the judgment is that failure to comply with the legislative mandate does not necessarily vitiate the judgment and decree if it does not affect the merits of the case or the jurisdiction of the court.

( 1 ) THIS Miscellaneous second appeal is by the plaintiff in O. S. No. 68 of 1983 on the file of the Principal Munsiff, Puttur, who had earlier secured a decree at the hands of the munsiff at Puttur, awarding to him a decree as prayed for after treating the defendant in the suit as not a debtor under the Karnataka debt Relief Act ('act' for short ). The aggrieved defendant preferred an appeal to the civil Judge, Puttur in R A. No. 26 of 1984 and succeeded in getting the judgment and decree of the Munsiff, reversed, buttressed with a further direction to the Munsiff to dispose off the suit again in conformity with the directions made by the Civil Judge.

( 2 ) WHAT the learned Civil Judge, did was to set-aside the judgment and decree of the munsiff and to remit the entire case back to him for disposal of the case on all the issues with a specific direction to the Munsiff to try and dispose of the issue relating to the status of the defendant as a 'debtor' under the Act, as a preliminary issue.

( 3 ) IT is seen from the order of the learned civil Judge, that he had found fault with the learned Munsiff, in not trying the issue relating to the status of the defendant as a preliminary issue and disposing it off independently before the disposal of the suit, on its merits.

( 4 ) THE Civil Judge, pointed out that the requirement of enquiring into the status of the defendant under the Act had to be mandatorily performed at the thresh-hold itself, treating it as a preliminary issue as enjoined by the provisions of the Act. Any omission to do so, the learned Civil Judge, has held to be wholly venial and productive of an abortive result. Therefore, it is he set-aside the judgment and decree of the munsiff and ordered remit of the case as aforesaid.

( 5 ) THE aggrieved plaintiff, who has preferred, this appeal challenges the tenability of the view of the learned Civil judge's treating the omission of the learned munsiff in not disposing of the issue relating to the defendant's status as a 'debtor' as a preliminary issue. It is pointed out that the defendant, himself had not demurred against the procedure adopted by the learned Munsiff, who had after the raising of an issue relating to the defendant's status had proceeded to dispose it off along with all the other issues, bearing on the merits of the dispute between the parties. Under these circumstances it is urged that there being no evidence of any prejudice having been caused to the defendant in the procedure adopted by the Munsiff, as aforesaid and granting that it was erroneous; it had not resulted in any manifest injustice to any one and much-less to the defendant, that the learned Civil Judge, ought not to have therefore seized upon this omission by the Munsiff, to non- suit the plaintiff and to send the matter to the trial Court once again for a fresh disposal.

( 6 ) I am to mention that the defendant, who was successful before the learned Civil judge, has not chosen to evince any interest in this appeal. He has after service of notice remained absent at the hearing of the appeal, which clearly indicates that he was not very much concerned with the out come of this appeal. That circumstance does not make any difference to the proceedings herein, which has got to be disposed of on the basis of the merits of the matter.

( 7 ) IT is seen from the judgment of the learned Munsiff, that he had raised as many as five issues; with the sixth issue being the general one as to the nature of the relief to be awarded. Amongst them, the second one was the issue bearing on the status of the defendant as a 'debtor' under the Act. Bearing upon these issues the parties had admittedly led evidence. The plaintiff had examined himself and produced documents, from Exhibits P-1 to P-5, as against which the defendant rested the contents by examining himself and produced no documents.

( 8 ) ON a consideration of the totality of the evidence adduced by both sides, the learned munsiff, proce