The term 'Corporation' in the Kerala Scheduled Tribe (Restriction on Transfer of Lands and Restoration of Alienated Lands) Act, 1975, does not encompass every incorporated entity, but refers to entities similar in purpose to Cooperative Societies, excluding private financial agencies engaged in profit-making business.

1. The question which arises for consideration is whether the petitioner, a Scheduled Bank, as defined in the Reserve Bank of India Act, 1934, is "a Corporation" or "any other financial agency not being a private agency" within the meaning of clause (c) of S.3 of the Kerala Scheduled Tribe (Restriction on Transfer of Lands and Restoration of Alienated Lands) Act, 1975 (hereinafter referred to as the Act). Clause (c) of S.3 of the Act lists the entities to whom the Act docs not apply. The question arises out of the facts stated in Para.2 and 3 below.

I. The facts

2. The petitioner instituted suit No. 280/76, for recovery of Rs. 71,836.66 secured through mortgage of lands of the respondents. A final decree was made. In E. P. No. 182 of 1979, the property of the respondents was brought to sale. However, the respondents filed E.A. No. 414 of 1981 for postponement of the sale under R.83 of O.21 of the Code of Civil Procedure, which was dismissed. The respondents challenged the dismissal of E.A. No. 414 of 1981, in C.R.P. No. 1832 of 1981 B. While dismissing the C.R.P., this Court granted to the respondents six months' time, running from 6th November 1985, for the purpose of depositing the decretal debt and postponed the sale till then. The respondents did not urge in E.A. No. 414 of 1981 or in C.R.P. No. 1832 of 1981 that they were members of a Scheduled Tribe and that their properties were exempt from sale by virtue of the Act.

3. The respondents filed one more execution application E.A. No. 181/87. The respondents are admittedly members of a Scheduled Tribe. They claimed the benefits under the Act. In reply, the petitioner relied upon clause (c) of S.3 of the Act which takes away the benefit of the Act in certain cases. In his order dated 11th October 1990 in E.A. No. 181/87, which is impugned in this petition, the learned I Additional Sub Judge held that the petitioner was not "any other financial agency not being a private agency" and that therefore S.3 (c) of the Act did not assist them. Since the petitioner was out of the statutory exemption, the Act which makes the mortgage of lands by members of Scheduled Tribes to persons who are not members of such Tribes invalid, applies to them. Therefore the Trial Court concluded that the transfer of property by the respondents in favour of the petitioner is invalid.

II. Res Judicata

4. Before proceeding to consider whether the petitioner falls within clause (c) of S.3 of the Act, I will dispose of a preliminary point urged by learned counsel for the petitioner. According to him the question whether the respondents as members of the Scheduled Tribe are entitled to the benefit of the Act, is barred by principles of res judicata for the simple reason that in C.R.P. No. 1832 of 1991-B disposed off by this Court on 6th November 1989, the respondents did not urge this point.

The Act received the assent of the President of India on 11th November 1975 and was published in the Kerala Gazette Extra ordinary No. 673, dated 14th November 1975. But S.1 (3) of the Act stipulates that the Act shall come into force on such date as the Government may, by notification in the Gazette, appoint. In other words, the Act did not come into force immediately upon the President's assent or its publication in the Gazette. The date of its commencement was to be determined by the Government. The Act was brought into force by the Government's Notification No. G.O. (Ms.) 5/86/RD., dated 20th January 1986. The C.R.P. No. 1832/81 was disposed of on 6th November, 1985. Therefore, on the date on which the C.R.P. No. 1832/81-B was disposed of the notification dated 20th January 1986 whereunder the Act was brought into force had not been issued. Therefore, the petitioner could not have claimed the protection of the Act until 20th January 1986. No doubt the notification made the Act enforceable with effect from 1st January 1982. But the fact remains that the petitioner did not know about the commencement of the Act until 2