SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1952 Supreme(Bom) 158

M.C.CHAGLA
Keshav Ganashyam – Appellant
Versus
Waman Rangaji – Respondent


JUDGMENT - Chagla, C.J.

A very interesting and important question under the Bombay Agricultural Debtors Relief Act arises 011 this revision application. The petitioner filed a suit in the Court of small Causes, Sawantwadi, to recover a debt, and the learned Judge held that the debt was extinguished under Section 15, Bombay Agricultural Debtors Relief Act and non-suited the plaintiff; and the point that has been urged before me by Mr. Walawalkar on behalf of the plaintiff is that the learned Judge was in error in preventing the plaintiff from contending that the defendant was not a debtor within the meaning of the Bombay Agricultural Debtors Relief Act and therefore the provisions of Section 15 would not apply.

(2) In this case an application for adjustment of debt was made by a creditor under Section 4, and on that application the Court held that the defendant was a debtor and passed an award adjusting the debts of the defendant. The defen- dants contention before the learned Small Causes Court Judge was that inasmuch as an award has been made in his favour by the Bombay Agricultural Debtors Relief Act Court and inasmuch as the debt of the plaintiff was not included in that award, t




Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top