9911796707
TMI Blog1964 (2) TMI 87X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Jodhpur, for ₹ 99,965-3-6, praying for attachment of the amount of compensation and rehabilitation grant which would be paid to the judgment debtor on account of resumption of his jagir. This case was registered as Execution Case No. 12/57. On July 29, 1957, the judgment- debtor made an application before the District Judge, Jodhpur, to the effect that the decretal amount should be reduced in accordance with s. 5 of the Rajasthan Jagirdars Debt Reduction Act (Rajasthan Act IX of 1957). On July 31, 1957, the judgment-debtor submitted another application claiming that only half of his total jagir compensation and rehabilitation grant money was liable to attachment under s. 7 of the said Act. The decree-holder, in his reply to those petitions, urged that the provisions relied on were ultra vires the Constitution of India being in contravention of Arts. 14, 19 and 31 of the Constitution. On December 3, 1957, the decree-holder filed a petition under Art. 228 of the Constitution, praying that the execution case No. 12 of 1957, pending in the Court of the District Judge, Jodhpur, be withdrawn from that Court to the Rajasthan High Court. The High Court transferred the case to it ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ting the mortgage was obtained from the competent authority, and whether the mortgage was validly subsisting on the date of resumption of the jagir lands. (b) if the mortgage was legally and properly made and was validly subsisting on the aforesaid date, the court shall reduce the amount due in accordance with the formula given in Schedule 1. (3) Where the mortgaged property consists partly of jagir lands as aforesaid and partly of property other than such lands, the court shall after taking action in accordance with the provisions of subclause (a) of sub-section (2), proceed to distribute. the amount due on the two properties separately in accordance with the principles contained in section 82 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882 (IV of 1882) as if they had been properties belonging separately to -two persons with separate: and distinct rights of ownership; and after the amount due has been so distributed, reduce the amount due on the jagir lands in accordance with the formula given in Schedule 1. S. 4-Powers to reduce secured debt after passing of decree.- (1) Nothwithstanding anything in the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (V of 1908) or any other law, the court which p ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s. 7(2), he urged that it imposed reasonable restrictions, in the interest of general public, on the creditors. Before examining the validity of the impugned provisions, it is necessary to examine the scheme of the Act. As the preamble states in plain terms, the object of the Act is to scale down debts of Jagirdars whose jagir lands have been resumed under the provisions of the Rajasthan Land Reforms and Resumption of Jagirs Act. Clause (e) of s. 2 defines debt to mean an advance in cash or in kind. The definition ,does not embrace dues of Government or a local authority in respect of taxes, land revenue, etc. The definition then excludes from the purview of the Act debts due to Central Government and other authorities and bodies mentioned in the clause. We shall advert to them later when discussing the validity of this exclusion. Section 3 provides for reduction of secured debts in accordance with the formula given in Schedule 1 at the time of passing a decree, and their apportionment where necessary, between jagir and non-jagir property. Section 4 provides for reduction of secured debts after a decree has been passed. Section 5 directs a court to pass a fresh decree after ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nection, Mr. Kapur has relied on the decision of this Court in Manna Lal vs. Collector of Jhalwar (1). This case is clearly distinguishable because there a law giving special facility for the recovery of dues to a bank owned by the Government was held not to offend Art. 14 of the Constitution. It is clear that the government can be legitimately put in a separate category for the purpose of laying down the procedure for the recovery of its dues. Mr. Kapur further relied on Nand Ram Chhotey Lal vs. Kishore Raman Singh (2). The judgment of the High Court undoubtedly supports him, but, with respect, we are unable to agree with the ratio of the case. The High Court was concerned with. the U.P. Zamindars Debt Reduction Act (U.P. Act XV of 1953), which is substantially similar to the impugned Act The ratio of the High Court is: It appears to us that the legislature had to make a distinction between debts due from the exzamindars to private individuals and the debts due to scheduled banks or to Government or semi-Government authorities. The obvious reason appears to be that the private money-lenders were considered to be a bane to rural economy and perpetrating agricultural indebtedness. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
