( 1 ) THIS is a revision preferred by the defendant-applicants against order dated 10-12-1977 passed by the Second Additional District Judge, Gwalior, passed in small Cause Suit No. 70/ 1976, whereby it has been held that the Madhya pradesh Anusuchit Janjati Rini Sahayata Adhiniyam (12 of 1967) is not applicable, because the loan sought to be recovered on the basis of a bond dated 5-5-1974 was not subsisting on the appointed date.

( 2 ) LEARNED counsel for the applicants Shri B. S. Saxena has raised the following contentions:- (

i) That although the debt sought to be recovered is alleged to have been advanced on the basis of a bond dated 5-5-1974, yet by virtue of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes Orders (Amendment)Act, 1976 (No. 108 of 1976) assented to by the President on 18th Sept. 1976 published in the Gazette of India (Extraordinary) Part II, section 1 dated 20-9-1976, the appointed date will be deemed to be the date of publication of the aforesaid Amendment Act and, as such, the applicants are entitled to the benefit of the Act No. 12 of 1967. (ii) That the aforesaid Amendment Act No. 108/1976 should be deemed to be retrospective in effect, Therefore, it should be deemed that the loan was advanced on the appointed date and, as such, the applicants will be entitled to the benefit of the Act. In the alternative it was contended that even if the provisions of the aforesaid amendment Act are prospective in effect, the benefit of the Act will go to the applicants, as the appointed date will be considered to be 20-91976. Consequently, the jurisdiction of the Civil Court is ousted in view of the provisions of Section 7 (2) of the Act No. 12 of 1967.

( 3 ) LEARNED counsel for the plaintiff-non-applicants Shri B. M. Agrawal supported the impugned order and contended that none of the aforesaid contentions raised by the learned counsel for the applicants has any force and that since the debt was not subsisting on the appointed date, the Act No. 12 of 1967 is not applicable. He further argued that the appointed date is 15-8-1973. The loan being advanced on 5-5-1974, the Act No. 12 of 1967 has no applicability to the suit. He placed reliance on the ratio of the case reported in ).

( 4 ) AFTER having heard the learned counsel for both the parties, I am of opinion that none of the contentions advanced by the learned counsel for the applicants has any force,

( 5 ) BEFORE taking up for consideration the contentions advanced by the learned counsel for the applicants, It is necessary to trace the history of applicability of the Act No. 12 of 1967, The Act in Section 1 provides that it extends to the whole of Madhya Pradesh. Sub-section (3) of Section 1 reads as under:--

" (3) It shall come into force- (a) in the scheduled areas, on the data on which the Madhya Pradesh Scheduled Tribes Debt Relief regulations, 1962, In force therein are repealed, and (b) in other areas, at once. " The definition Section 2 provides that-"in this Act, unless the context otherwise requires- (1) "appointed date" means (a) in relation to the Scheduled areas, the date on which the Madhya Pradesh scheduled Tribes Debt Relief regulations, ,1962 in force therein are repealed, and (b) in relation to other areas, the 15th march 1967, x x x x. "

( 6 ) IT Ss common ground that the Act No. 12 of 1967 did not extend to scheduled Castes prior to 15-8-1973. It was applicable to Scheduled Tribes before the State Government by issuing Notification No. 164-73-XXV-II dated 30th June 1973, published in the M, P. Raj-patra Part I dated 20-7-1973, appointed 15th Aug. 1973 as the date on which the said Adhiniyam (Act No. 12 of 1967) shall come into force In its application to the members of the scheduled Castes,

( 7 ) THEREAFTER, by the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes Orders (Amendment) Act, 1976 (No. 108 of 1976), referred to above, Koli Kori were included in the list of Scheduled Castes so far as Madhya Pradesh is concerned, and in the Schedule, Part IX,