9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (1) TMI 197X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mainstay of the submissions of learned counsel for the petitioner - to ward off the attachment and sale of the property bearing No. 3, Racquet Court Road, Civil Lines, Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the 'said property'), is the protection afforded to a Judgment Debtor/ Certificate Debtor by Section 60(1)(ccc) of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (the Code) as applicable to Delhi. Thus, the scope and interpretation of the said provision arises for consideration before us. Before we proceed, we may take note of a few admitted facts, and facts emerging from the record. We may observe that the petitioner has selectively filed documents before us. The petitioner has not disputed the factual position as recorded in, and emerging from the orders passed by the Recovery Officer (R.O.), the Debt Recovery Tribunal (DRT) and the DRAT. We have, therefore, proceeded to consider the matter in the light of facts found in the orders passed by the said Authorities/ Tribunals. 4. Late Sh. B.R. Dougall (BRD in short) [described as respondent No.4 in the present writ petition], undisputedly, was the owner of the said property having acquired the same on his own. M/s Atul Food Products Limited obta ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ds as follows: "2. When a certificate has been drawn up by the Tax Recovery officer for the recovery of arrears under this Schedule, the Tax Recovery Officer shall cause to be served upon the defaulter a notice requiring the defaulter to pay the amount specified in the certificate within fifteen days from the date of service of the notice and intimating that in default steps would be taken to realise the amount under this Schedule". 7. From the record, it appears that the certificate - which means the certificate drawn up by the Recovery Officer in respect of the defendant under the Act, was duly drawn up and served, inter alia, on BRD (CD-3) in March, 2002. 8. Rule 4 of the Second Schedule provides for mode of recovery. The same, inter alia, provides that if the amount mentioned in the notice is not paid within the time specified in the notice referable to Rule 2, the Recovery Officer shall proceed to realize the amount, inter alia, by attachment and sale of the defaulter's immovable property. Rule 5 of the Second Schedule provides for recovery of interest, costs and charges as well. These Rules read as follows: "4. If the amount mentioned in the notice is not paid within th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... otherwise deal with any property belonging to him except with the permission of the Tax Recovery Officer, nor shall any civil court issue any process against such property in execution of a decree for the payment of money. (2). Where an attachment has been made under this Schedule, any private transfer or delivery of the property attached or of any interest therein and any payment to the defaulter of any debt, dividend or other moneys contrary to such attachment, shall be void as against all claims enforceable under the attachment." (emphasis supplied) 11. Rule 48 provides for attachment of immovable property of the defaulter. The same reads as follows: "48. Attachment of the immovable property of the defaulter shall be made by an order prohibiting the defaulter from transferring or charging the property in any way and prohibiting all persons from taking any benefit under such transfer or charge." 12. Rule 51 provides that where any immovable property is attached under the Second Schedule, the attachment shall relate back to and take effect from the date on which the notice to pay the arrears (amount due under the Recovery Certificate) issued under the Second Schedule was ser ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nwhile, till the disposal of present objection/claim filed by objector, the further proceedings qua property bearing No.3, Racquet Court Road, Civil Lines, Delhi may kindly be stayed." 18. The petitioner claimed that she was a bona fide purchaser without notice for valuable consideration of the said property from the erstwhile owner, namely BRD (CD-3) vide sale deed dated 29.11.2006. She claimed that BRD (CD-3) had mortgaged the said property with the Indian Overseas Bank (IOB) in respect of the loan obtained by his son Vivek Dougall in the name of his sole proprietary firm M/s Vinayak International Inc. sometime in 1993. She claimed that IOB had instituted O.A. No.15/2002 against Vivek Dougall and BRD in his capacity as surety/ guarantor before the DRT. IOB had made an offer for One-Time Settlement of the outstanding dues for Rs. 2,09,18,000/- on 16.09.2006. She claimed that her father and brother had offered to buy the said property in her name for Rs. 2,11,90,000/. 19. The IOB had agreed to the said sale. Consequently, the said property was purchased in the name of the petitioner vide sale deed dated 29.11.2006. She claimed that she had also got mutated the said property in he ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... D (CD-3) and Vivek Dougall. The UBI contended that the transfer of the said property in favour of the petitioner was also hit by Section 52 of the Transfer of Property Act. 23. The Recovery Officer rejected the objections preferred by the petitioner vide order dated 13.05.2016. He took note of the fact that as per the record, the demand notice dated 15.03.2002 was issued to the certificate debtor's - including BRD (CD-3), and all the CDs were served at their recorded addresses in March 2002. BRD (CD-3) appeared, for the first time, before the Recovery Officer on 11.10.2002 through counsel and he appeared in person on 16.12.2002. He filed his affidavit of assets on 24.08.2004, which disclosed the said property as his self-occupied property. On the same day, i.e. 24.08.2004, the CDs, including BRD (CD-3) were restrained from creating third party interest whatsoever to the detriment of the CH Bank UBI in the immovable assets which was a part of the record. BRD (CD-3) filed an additional affidavit vide Diary No.3060 dated 29.09.2004, wherein he again disclosed that he was the owner of the said property, which was self-occupied by him. The Recovery Officer notes that on the date of ser ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ior to its attachment. She placed reliance on Hamda Ammal Vs. Avadiappa Pathar & 3 Others, (1991) 1 SCC 715. The respondent UBI defended the order passed by the learned Recovery Officer. The DRT dismissed the appeal of the petitioner on 21.09.2016. It rejected the petitioner's reliance on Hamda Ammal (supra), since the demand notice in the present case had been issued on 15.03.2002; BRD (CD-3) was served with the same in March, 2002; BRD (CD-3) had appeared before the Recovery Officer of the DRT through counsel on 11.10.2002 and in person on 16.12.2002, and also filed his affidavits disclosing his assets - including the said property as his self-acquired property of which he was in possession on 24.08.2004; he had filed an additional affidavit on 29.09.2004 also to the same effect; the attachment - by virtue of Rule 51 of the Second Schedule of the I.T Act related back to the date of service of notice under Rule 2, and; therefore, the attachment made in 2011 related back to the year 2002. Transfer of the said property by BRD (CD-3) in the year 2006 was in the teeth of Rule 16 of the Second Schedule to the Income Tax Act. 26. The petitioner preferred a further appeal before the DRA ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tice as provided under Rule 2, which admittedly in the present case was served in March, 2002, and not the date of attachment. Therefore, even if it is accepted that the appellant - objector was in possession of the property in question in April, 2011 when the learned Recovery Officer had attached the property which she was claiming to be her matrimonial home also that possession and even the sale deed allegedly executed in her favour by her father - in - law before that attachment order of the Recovery Officer will not confer any interest upon her for the purpose of getting an order of withdrawal of attachment under Rule 11". 29. The learned DRAT rejected the submission of the petitioner that the sale executed by BRD (CD-3) in her favour of the said property was to redeem the mortgage with the IOB and, therefore, the prohibition against the sale of any property belonging to the CD by him after he has been served with a demand notice under Rule 2 of the Second Schedule is not attracted, by observing "However, I do not find any substance in the above argument of Mr. D.K. Malhotra. In the present case Rule 2 notice stood served upon the deceased Mr. Dougall in March, 2002 and ther ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s which were part of the record. The said property was also a part of the record of the Recovery Officer, since the same was disclosed by BRD (CD-3) as his personal assets in his occupation in his affidavit dated 24.08.2004. He had filed an additional affidavit on 29.09.2004 to the same effect. We may observe that, though the Authorities/ Tribunals below have proceeded on the basis that orders for attachment were passed on 18.04.2011 and 26.05.2011, to us, it appears that the attachment orders were issued in respect of the said property, firstly, on 24.08.2004 - when the C.D.s, including CD-3 (BRD) was restrained from creating any third party interest whatsoever, to the detriment of the CH-UBI. We state so, since the manner of attachment of immovable property of the defaulter under Rule 48 of the Second Schedule is made "by an order, inter alia, prohibiting the defaulter (which CD-3/ BRD was) from transferring or charging the property in any way ... ...". However, even if the attachment of the said property is taken to have been ordered on 18.04.2011 and 26.05.2011, it makes no difference, since the same relates back to, and takes effect from the date on which the notice to pay the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... amda Ammal (supra), keeping in view the facts of the present case. We, therefore, do not find any reason to interfere with the impugned order on any aspect raised before the DRAT and decided by it. 33. A perusal of the impugned order shows that the petitioner actually did not even urge before the learned DRAT the issue raised by learned counsel for the petitioner before us, namely, that the said property could not be sold in execution i.e. for recovery of the amount due under the recovery certificate, since the same was the only residential property of BRD (CD-3) till the time that he transferred the same to the petitioner, and, thereafter the same is the only residential property of the petitioner. 34. However, when the writ petition was taken up for initial hearing on 11.03.2019, learned counsel for the petitioner sought to advance the submission taken note of in paragraph 3 hereinabove. Learned counsel for the petitioner sought an adjournment to address the Court on the aspect whether Section 60(1)(ccc) of the Code, as applicable to Delhi, is attracted in the facts of the present case. The matter was, thereafter, heard at length and judgment reserved. 35. To begin with, we ma ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d (ccc) have been added, which are relevant and shall be taken note of hereinafter. Nevertheless, even the unamended clause (c) in the proviso exempts houses and other buildings with the material and the sites thereof and the land immediately appurtenant thereto and necessary for their enjoyment "belonging to an agriculturist or a labourer or a domestic servant" and occupied by him, from attachment and sale in execution of a decree. Evidently, the Parliament granted exemption in Clause (c) of the proviso to Section 60(1) in respect of the poorer classes of persons comprising of agriculturists, labourers, and domestic servants. 37. Amendments to, inter alia, section 60 (c), and the introduction clauses (cc) and (ccc) [with which we are specifically concerned] were introduced by the Punjab Relief of Indebtedness Act, 1934 [Punjab Act No. VII of 1934] (PRI Act for short), which was extended in its application to Delhi. 38. Before coming back to the relevant clause of Section 60 CPC, we may now turn our attention to the PRI Act. The PRI Act was enacted even prior to the coming into force of the Government of India Act, 1935 and Parts thereof were extended to the whole of Punjab (as t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ans a person who owes a debt, and (i) who both earns his livelihood mainly by agriculture, and is either a landowner, or tenant of agricultural land, or a servant of a land owner, or of a tenant of agricultural land, or (ii) who earns his livelihood as a village menial paid in cash or kind for work connected with agriculture. Provided that a member of a tribe, notified as agricultural under the Punjab Alienation of Land Act, 1900, shall be presumed to be a debtor as defined in this section until it is proved that his income from other sources is greater than his income from agriculture. Explanation. - (i) A debtor shall not lose his status as such through involuntary unemployment or an account of incapacity, temporary or permanent, by bodily infirmity, or, if he is or has been in service of His Majesty's Military or Naval Forces, only on account of his pay and allowances or pension exceeding his income from agricultural sources. (ii) A debtor shall not lose his status as such by reason of the fact that he makes income by using his plough cattle for purposes of transport. (iii) A debtor shall not lose his status as such only because he does not cultivate with his own ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ds as follows: "No. 189/38. - In exercise of the powers conferred by section 7 of the Delhi Laws Act, 1912 (XIII of 1912), and in supersession of all previous notifications under that section extending Punjab Acts to the Province of Delhi or any part thereof, except the notification of the Government of India in the Department of Education, Health and Lands, No. F. 117/32-L. & O., dated the 26th January, 1933, the Central Government is pleased to extend to the Province of Delhi or such part thereof as is specified in the second column of the Schedule annexed hereto, the enactments specified in the corresponding entry in the first column thereof, subject to the restrictions and modifications, if any, specified in the corresponding entry in the third column, and to the following provisions, namely :- (i) references in the first column of the said Schedule to an Act shall be deemed to be references to that Act as in force in the Punjab on the date of this notification, and (ii) references in the said enactments to the Provincial Government shall be construed as references to the Chief Commissioner of Delhi, and references to the Punjab shall be construed as references to the Pr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d to be inserted, namely:- (cc) Milch animals, whether in milk or in calf, kids, animals used for the purposes of transport or draught carts, and open spaces or enclosures belonging to an agriculturist and required for use in case of need for tying cattle, parking carts, or stacking fodder or manure; (ccc) one main residential house and other buildings attached to it (with the material and the sites thereof and the land immediately appurtenant thereto and necessary for their enjoyment) belonging to a judgment-debtor other than an agriculturist and occupied by him: Provided that the protection afforded by this sub-section shall not extend to property which has been mortgaged; (b) after subsection (2), the following subsections shall be deemed to be inserted namely:- (3) Notwithstanding any other law for the time being in force an agreement by which a debtor agrees to waive any benefit of any exemption under this section shall be void. (4) For the purposes of this section the word "agriculturist" shall include every person whether as owner, tenant, partner or agricultural labourer who depends for his livelihood mainly on income from agricultural land as defined in the Pun ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... words and figures "the Punjab Relief of Indebtedness Act, 1934", the words and figures, as extended to the State of Delhi" shall be substituted. 2. In Section 3 - (i) for the words "Imperial Bank", the words "State Bank" shall be substituted; and (ii) for the words and figures "the Co-operative Societies Act, 1912" the words and figures "the Bombay Co-operative Societies Act, 1925, as extended to the State of Delhi" shall be substituted. 3. In section 14, in clause (b) for the words, figures and brackets "commencement of the Punjab Relief of Indebtedness (Amendment) Act, 1940", the words, figures and brackets "date of the extension of the Punjab Relief of Indebtedness (Amendment) Act, 1940, to the State of Delhi" shall be substituted. 4. In section 16, in clause (b), the words and figures "as defined in the Punjab Alienation of Land Act, 1900" and "every member of a tribe notified as agricultural under the Punjab Alienation of Land Act, 1900, and" shall be omitted. The Punjab Relief of Indebtedness (Amendment) Act, 1942 (Punjab Act VI of 1942) ..... 49. Resultantly, Section 35 of the PRI Act, as amended and extended for application in the State of Delhi, reads as fo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... orce immediately before the commencement in the territories, and which immediately before 01.11.1956 were comprised in the State of Punjab, were extended to and came in force in the transferred territories i.e. the territories comprised in the State of Patiala and East Punjab States Union before 01.11.1956. 51. Section 3 of the Punjab Money-lending and Debtors' Protection Laws (Extension and Amendment) Act, 1960 reads as follows: "3. Extension of certain moneylending, and debtors' protection laws to transferred territories - (1) The following Acts, namely, - (i) the Punjab Regulation of Accounts Act, 1930 (I of 1930), (ii) the Punjab Relief of Indebtedness Act, 1934 (VII of 1934), (iii) the Punjab Debtors' Protection Act 1936 (II of 1936), and (iv) the Punjab Registration of Moneylenders Act, 1938 (IV of 1938), and all rules, notifications and orders made, and all directions or instructions issued, thereunder, which are in force immediately before the commencement of this Act in the territories which, immediately before the 1st November, 1956, were comprised in the State of Punjab, are hereby extended to and shall be in force in, the transferred territories. (2) ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of Statutory Interpretation by Justice G.P. Singh, and quoted the following text from the said book, which reads: "Incorporation of an earlier Act into a later Act is a legislative device adopted for the sake of convenience in order to avoid verbatim reproduction of the provisions of the earlier Act into the later. When an earlier Act or certain of its provisions are incorporated by reference into a later Act, the provisions so incorporated become part and parcel of the later Act as if they had been 'bodily transposed into it'. The effect of incorporation is admirably stated by Lord Esher, M.R.: '... If a subsequent Act brings into itself by reference some of the clauses of a former Act, the legal effect of that, as has often been held, is to write those sections into the new Act just as if they had been actually written in it with the pen, or printed in it....' [Wood's Estate, In re, ex p Works and Buildings Commissioners, (1886) 31 Ch D 607 (CA) at p. 615] Even though only particular sections of an earlier Act are incorporated into later, in construing the incorporated sections it may be at times necessary and permissible to refer to other parts of the earlier statute wh ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Code by means of Section 35 of the PRI Act, as amended and extended to Delhi, stands repealed after the passing of the Amendment Act 104 of 1976, amending the Code, specially in the light of Section 97(1) of the amendment Act of 1976. Section 97(1) of the Amendment Act of 1976, whereby the Code was amended, reads as follows: "97(1) Any amendment made, or any provision inserted in the Principal Act by a State Legislature or a High Court before the commencement of this Act shall, except in so far as such amendment or provision is consistent with the provisions of the principal Act as amended by this Act, stand repealed." 58. Learned counsel submits that in paragraph 4 of this decision, the Division Bench set out the consequence of the amendments to the PRI Act, as applicable to the State of Punjab by observing "that though under the Code there was no exemption from attachment and sale of a main residential house of judgment-debtor yet by virtue of these Punjab Amendments the code, in so far as in its application to the State of Punjab was concerned, clause (ccc) exempted from attachment one main residential house belonging to a judgment-debtor." 59. The Division Bench observed, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... umstances but only if inserted by Act of legislature or a High Court. The contention of Mr. Tikku is that the insertion of clause (ccc) in proviso to Section 60(1) of the Code, though effected by Punjab Amendment Act XII of 1940 and Punjab Act VI of 1942 a State amendment, cannot be treated to be so, when extended to Delhi by a notification of 1956 issued by the Central Government as mentioned above. The extension in Delhi, it is claimed is by an Act of Parliament and thus is outside the ambit of Section 97(1) of 1976 Act. So far as Punjab is concerned, there is no dispute that the insertion of clause (ccc) in proviso is by virtue of a legislation by the State Legislature. If the view of Luthra, J. and Sultan Singh, J. that the provision of the Code as amended by 1976 are inconsistent with clause (ccc) (of which we express no opinion) is correct the result undoubtedly would be that clause (ccc) may no longer be available so far as the State of Punjab is concerned. But the same consequence does not follow in the Union territory of Delhi." (emphasis supplied) 62. The Division Bench held that the extension of PRI Act to the Union Territory of Delhi was an exercise of the authority co ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nserted clause (ccc) in proviso to Section 60(1) of the Code. Under Section 222 read with Rule 10 of the Second Schedule to the Income-tax Act, all such property as is by the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, exempted from attachment and sale in execution of a decree of a civil court shall be exempt from attachment and sale under this Schedule. Hence in proceedings before the Tax Recovery Officer, in Delhi the provisions of clause (ccc) in proviso to Section 60(1) of the Code are applicable." (emphasis supplied) 66. Premised on the aforesaid observation, the submission of learned counsel for the petitioner is that the Division Bench rejected the submission of the respondent/ revenue, that clause (ccc) of the Proviso to Section 60(1) would be available only in respect of proceedings under the PRI Act 1934, as amended. 67. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that Clause (ccc) of the proviso to Section 60(1) should be construed and read plainly, and that there is no occasion for this Court to expand or restrict the meaning and scope of that provision. In this regard, he places reliance on Centre for Public Interest Litigation v. Union of India and Others, 139 (2007) DLT 289 (DB) ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... I Act, whereby Section 60 of the CPC, as applicable to the State of Punjab was amended, which was later on extended and made applicable to Delhi. In this decision, the Supreme Court quoted its observations in Ashwini Kumar Ghose and Anr. v. Arabinda Bose and Anr., AIR 1952 SC 369, wherein Patanjali Sastri, CJ had observed in paragraph 32: "32. As regards the propriety of the reference to the statement of objects and reasons, it must be remembered that it seeks only to explain what reasons induced the mover to introduce the Bill in the House and what objects he sought to achieve. But those objects and reasons may or may not correspond to the objective which the majority of Members had in view when they passed it into law. The Bill may have undergone radical changes during its passage through the House or Houses, and there is no guarantee that the reasons which led to its introduction and the objects thereby sought to be achieved have remained the same throughout till the Bill emerges from the House as an Act of the legislature for they do not form part of the Bill and are not voted upon by the members. We, therefore, consider that the Statement of objects and reasons appended to t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... stood repealed, so far as Delhi is concerned, by virtue of Section 97(1) of the Amendment Act, 1976, whereby the Code was amended. The scope of, and the meaning to be ascribed to Clause (ccc) of proviso to Section 60(1) of the Code was not considered by the Division Bench in that case. Even while dealing with the submission of the Revenue (advanced by Mr. Wazir Singh, Advocate) - that Clause (ccc) of proviso to Section 60(1) of the Code having been introduced by the PRI Act, 1934, it was available in proceedings under the PRI Act, 1934, as amended, the Court did not examine the scope and meaning to be ascribed to Clause (ccc) of proviso to Section 60(1) of the Code. Thus, S.C. Jain (supra) cannot be considered to be a binding precedent on the issue that has arisen for our consideration, namely, as to what is the meaning and scope of Clause (ccc) of the proviso to Section 60(1) of the Code; Is the expression "judgment-debtor" found in Clause (ccc) to be understood as any and every "judgment debtor" against whom a "debt" - as generally understood has been determined in a judicial/ quasi-judicial proceeding, or, whether the expression "judgment debtor" used in Clause (ccc) of the pro ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f agricultural produce has made the pressure of debt on the cultivator even heavier than these figures indicate, and the problem of finding some relief has now become a very acute one. At the end of March, 1932, the Punjab Government appointed a committee of members of the Legislative Council to consider this problem and to submit proposals for its solution. The Report of the Committee has been debated in the Legislative Council, and has been for some time under the careful and detailed consideration of Government, which have also been studying the steps taken in other provinces for the relief of indebtedness. In formulating the legislative measures embodied in this Bill, the Punjab Government have endeavoured to hold the balance fairly between the debtor and creditor and to give the former such relief as is possible without making any change in the law which might have the effect of destroying or seriously impairing the whole system of rural credit." (emphasis supplied) 78. Thus, the entire focus and thrust of the Bill moved- which came to be enacted as the PRI Act, was to ameliorate the miseries of small agriculturists, while balancing the rights of such debtors and creditors. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e State of Delhi the PRI Act, as amended, and it is not that the Parliament, de hors the provisions of the PRI Act, introduced amendments in the CPC so as to include, inter alia, Clause (ccc) in the proviso to Section 60(1) of the Code, as applicable to Delhi. 82. Aforesaid being the position, in our considered view, the expression "judgment debtor" used in Clause (ccc) of proviso to Section 60(1) of the Code has to be read and understood in the context of the meaning ascribed to the expression "debtor" in the parent Act, i.e. the PRI Act as amended, and the expression "judgment debtor" cannot be understood to mean any "judgment debtor", as generally understood. 83. Pertinently, the extracts from the Principles of Statutory Interpretation by Justice G.P. Singh relied upon by the Supreme Court in C.N. Paramsivam & Ors. (supra) support our view. The learned author has observed that "Even though only particular sections of an earlier Act are incorporated into later, in construing the incorporated sections it may be at times necessary and permissible to refer to other parts of the earlier statute which are not incorporated". The learned author quotes Lord Blackburn, where he observes ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of a former Act, the legal effect of that, as has often been held, is to write those sections into the new Act as if they had been actually written in it with the pen, or printed in it.' (p. 233) Even though only particular sections of an earlier Act are incorporated into later, in construing the incorporated sections it may be at times necessary and permissible to refer to other parts of the earlier statute which are not incorporated. As was stated by Lord Blackburn: 'When a single section of an Act of Parliament is introduced into another Act, I think it must be read in the sense it bore in the original Act from which it was taken, and that consequently it is perfectly legitimate to refer to all the rest of that Act in order to ascertain what the section meant, though those other sections are not incorporated in the new Act.' " (p. 244) 12. Once we have ascertained the object behind the legislation and held that the provisions of Section 205 quoted hereinabove stand bodily lifted and incorporated into the body of Section 115-J of the Income Tax Act, all that we have to do is to read the provisions plainly and apply rules of interpretation if any ambiguity survives. Section ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 00 and rupees 5000 per sq. yd., the land underneath the property should itself be worth above rupees two crores. The contention of the petitioners is that this property constitutes as their main residential house, and is therefore, exempt in terms of the provision contained in clause (ccc) of the proviso to Section 60 of the Code of Civil Procedure. 29. It will be relevant here to here to trace the history of how this provision was introduced in the Code of Civil Procedure. A series of redical fiscal legislations for the amelioration of the plight of poorer sections and agriculturists was set into motion during the Thirties in the erstwhile Province of Punjab by that remarkable legislator Sir Chhottu Ram. One such was the Punjab Relief of Indebtedness Act, 1934. Thereby considerable reliefs were provided to the debtors, and the primary object was to give protection to those debtors who had fallen to unfortunate days, and were likely to be thrown in the wilderness in case their only residential houses were as well attached and sold. It is unfortunate that hat progressive measure in the then existing State of social conditions is being now sought to be exploited by persons with suc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... reason for the introduction of the Bill could certainly be referred to for the purpose of ascertaining the mischief sought to be remedied by the legislation and the object and purpose for which the legislation was enacted. It has been reiterated that interpretation of a statute being an exercise in the ascertainment of meaning, everything which is logically relevant should be admissible. See in this connection the observations of this Court in Chern Taon Shang v. Commander S.D. Baijal [(1988) 1 SCC 507 : 1988 SCC (Cri) 162] ... ... ..." (emphasis supplied) 94. In the present context, it is essential to refer to the Objects & Reasons of the PRI Act to construe the meaning of the amendment introduced in the CPC by Section 35 of the PRI Act, to prevent absurd results of the kind lamented about by D.R. Khanna, J. in S.C. Jain (supra). The intention of the Legislature could never have been to provide protection against attachment and sale in execution of a decree, of the residential property owned by a judgment debtor - irrespective of the nature and extent of the residential property that the judgment debtor may own, and irrespective of the standing/ avocation/ background of the debto ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nce, it is by virtue of the PRI Act and, to fulfill the purpose & object of the said PRI Act, namely, to grant relief against indebtedness to agriculturists etc., that the said Clause (ccc) was introduced in the proviso to Section 60(1) of the Code. 96. Reliance placed by the petitioner on Gangadhar Vishwanath Ranade (dead) through Mrs. Shobha Ravindra Nemiwant (supra) is of no avail. This decision has no concern with the issue examined by us. The petitioner has sought to place reliance on the observation made by the Supreme Court in paragraph 9 of this decision, which reads as follows: "9. The Tax Recovery Officer, therefore, has to examine who is in possession of the property and in what capacity. He can only attach property in possession of the assessee in his own right, or in possession of a tenant or a third party on behalf of/for the benefit of the assessee. He cannot declare any transfer made by the assessee in favour of a third party as void. If the Department finds that a property of the assessee is transferred by him to a third party with the intention to defraud the Revenue, it will have to file a suit under Rule 11(6) to have the transfer declared void under Section ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tsoever. However, that is not the intendment of the law. 101. We, therefore, reject the submission of learned counsel for the petitioner that the said property is exempted from attachment and sale in execution of a decree of a Civil Court under the Code. Reliance placed by the petitioner on Rule 10 of the Rules is, therefore, of no avail and the same is rejected. 102. The writ petition is, accordingly, dismissed. C.M. No. 53294/2019 103. This application has been preferred by the petitioner to bring on record subsequent facts relating to settlement/ OTS arrived at by the petitioner with the respondent Union Bank of India. The petitioner seeks leave to withdraw the writ petition, as not pressed, in view of the said settlement/ OTS communicated vide letter dated 31.07.2019. In the alternative, the petitioner seeks protection of its interest in view of the said settlement/ OTS with the respondent bank, while passing the final judgment in the petition. 104. The petitioner states that after the judgment was reserved in the present petition on 02.04.2019, the petitioner had approached respondent Union Bank of India with a settlement offer. The petitioner's settlement offer of Rs. 41 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
