Patanjali Sastri, J.

1. This appeal has been brought by the defendant in a mortgage suit from a decree disallowing his claim to have the mortgage debt scaled down in accordance with the provisions of the Madras Agriculturists Relief Act. The respondents put forward two grounds for excluding the appellant from the benefits of the Act, namely, that the appellant was disqualified under proviso C to Section 3 (ii) of the Act from claiming to be an agriculturist, and secondly, that the debt itself was exempted from the operation of the Act by Section 4 (d).

2. As regards the first ground the relevant facts are these. The appellant was assessed within the period mentioned in the proviso to tax on property of an annual rental value of Rs. 500-8-0 of which she was the sole owner. She appears to have been assessed also to house-tax in respect of a house in which she was entitled to a seventh share. Ex. G-l the certificate issued by the Commissioner, Madura Municipality, under Section 27 of the Act is defective in that it does not state that the appellant and her co-sharers were actually. assessed to such tax during the relevant period but the parties clearly proceeded in the Court bel