9911796707
TMI Blog1958 (6) TMI 8X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he Money-lenders Act does apply to the suit. The respondents are money-lenders and they have obtained a license as money-lenders and they are governed by all the provisions of the Act. Mr. Shah has drawn my attention to certain provisions of the Money-lenders Act. Section 18 casts certain duties upon a money-lender with regard to keeping accounts, furnishing copies, etc., and Section 19 casts certain duties upon a moneylender with regard to delivery of statement of accounts and copies to the debtor. Section 21 provides: Notwithstanding anything contained in any law for the time being in force, in any suit to which this Act applies: (a) a Court shall, before deciding the claim on merits, frame and decide the issue whether the money ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hat those provisions are entirely inconsistent with the provisions to which I have just drawn attention. The scheme of Order XXXVII is well known. In a summary suit the defendant cannot defend the suit unless he has obtained leave from the Court. The leave may be unconditional, in which case the defendant has not to do anything further, or the leave may be conditional, in which case unless the condition is complied with the defendant cannot appear and defend at the hearing of the suit. What is more, if the defendant does not comply with the condition or if leave to defend is refused, the allegations in the plaint shall be deemed to be admitted and the plaintiff shall be entitled to a decree. Therefore, to use popular language, in a summary ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to defend even if he wants to defend. It is, as it were, a compulsory or coercive absence. The law shuts his mouth and eliminates him, as it were, from the hearing of the suit. It is. untenable to suggest that although the Act in all solemnity calls upon the Court to frame certain issues, when those issues are framed the defendant should be compulsorily prevented from appearing in the trial of those issues, because that would be the result if the suggestion made by Mr. Karanee were to be carried out. The defendant cannot appear under Order XXXVII and yet the Court must frame issues under Section 21 and decide those issues in the absence of the defendant, although the defendant would very much like to be present and help the Court in decidi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ay by the procedure with regard to summary suits laid down in Order XXXVII. Mr. Karanee contends that if notwithstanding the failure to comply with the conditions and notwithstanding the defendant not being in a position to defend the suit, if he could make an application under Section 30 there is nothing to prevent the same procedure being followed under Sections 21 and 29. Now, Section 30 is not in pari materia with Sections 21 and 29. Now, Section 30 enables the defendant to make the application contemplated by that section. He may or may not make that application. But Sections 21 and 29 are mandatory; they have nothing to do with the defendant. It is a duty cast by the Legislature upon the Court itself, and it is impossible for me to en ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
