The provisions of sections 4 to 24 of the Limitation Act are applicable to the M.P. Samaj Ke Kamjor Vargon Ke Krishi Bhumi Dharakon Ka Udhar Dene Walon Ke Bhumi Hadapane Sambandhi Kuchakron Se Paritran Tatha Mukti Adhiniyam, 1976 (Act 3 of 1977), except section 5 of the Limitation Act.

A.K. Mathur, J.

1. This is a reference made by the learned Single Judge to a Larger Bench for answer of the question whether sections 4 to 24 of the Limitation Act are expressly excluded from the M.P. Samaj Ke Kamjor Vargon Ke Krishi Bhumi Dharakon Ka Udhar Dene Walon Ke Bhumi Hadapane Sambandhi Kuchakron Se Paritran Tatha Mukti Adhiniyam, 1976 (3 of 1977), (for short, the Act), or not.

2. Brief facts which are necessary for convenient answer to this reference are that the respondent Shyamlal sold certain lands to Vijaysingh by two registered sale deeds dated 10-7-1986 of village Chiknouta, Tahsil Bina, Distt. Sagar, bearing Kh. No. 30, measuring 4.50 acres and by another sale deed dated 13-8-1987 of land measuring 1.214 hectares (3 acres) of the same Kh. number. Thereafter, he moved an application before the S.D.O. Bina challenging the validity of the two sale deeds by filing an application on 14-4-1995 on the ground that the sale deeds were executed for security of loans, they fall in the prohibited transactions as per scheme of the Act. The point of limitation was raised by Vijaysingh and the same was accepted by the S.D.O. Bina, the original Authority, and he dismissed the application. Aggrieved against this order, an appeal was preferred before the Collector u/s 8 of the Act and the Collector reversed the order of the S.D.O. and remanded the case back to the trial court that no period of limitation is prescribed for filing such an application, by order dated 28-12-1998 (Annexure P-5). Aggrieved against this order, the present writ petition was filed by the petitioner challenging the order of the Collector. In this background, the matter came up before the learned Single Judge who, after referring to the scheme of the Act (3 of 1977) and the provisions of the Limitation Act, has referred this case to a Larger Bench for deciding whether sections 4 to 24 of the Limitation Act are expressly applicable to this special enactment or not.

3. We have heard Learned Counsel for the parties.

4. In order to appreciate the controversy involved in the matter, it may be relevant to mention aims and objects of the Act of 1977 for which this enactment was made. They are better summarised in the statement of the Act of 1977 which read as under:

"This Act has been enacted by the legislature keeping in view the relief to the agricultural indebtedness and check on the land grabbing from the weaker section of the society which has fallen prey to the money lenders and they had to lose their lands in lieu of the loans advanced to them. Therefore, in order to contend this exploiting of these poor people, this Act has been enacted so that the poor agriculturists may not lose their land on account of the nefarious designs of these money lenders."

(i) Section 2 is with regard to definitions.

(ii) Section 2(f) deals with 'prohibited transactions of loan' against security of land. It reads as under:

"2(f) 'prohibited transaction of loan' means a transaction in which a lender of money advances loan to a holder of agricultural land against security of his interest in land, whether at the time of advancing the loan or at any time thereafter during the currency of the loan in any of the following modes, namely --

(i) agreement to sell land with or without delivery of possession;

(ii) outright sale of land with or without delivery of possession accompanied by separate agreement to re-sell it;

(iii) outright sale of land with or Without delivery of possession with a distinct oral understanding that the sale shall not be acted upon if the loan is re-paid;

(iv) outright sale of land with or without delivery of possession with a condition incorporated in the sale deed to re-sell it on repayment of the loan;

(v) transaction in any modes other than those specified in clauses (i) to (iv) affecting interest in land including a fraudulent transaction or a transaction designed to defeat the provisions of any law regulating money lending or interest, for the time being in f