9911796707
TMI Blog2001 (10) TMI 1199X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... iating the case may be stated thus: 4. The appellant herein mortgaged his land measuring about 3.07 acres for a sum of ₹ 10,000/- in favour of one Ramummal wife of Madasami Raja on 28.2.1965. The said mortgage was assigned in favour of the respondent No. 1 for consideration on 12.6.1974. The appellant filed the application dated 19.11.1980 before the Special Tahsildar (Debt. Relief), Sivakasi, seeking relief under the provisions of the Act on the ground that the annual household income during 1979 was ₹ 3600/- and the immovable properties owned by him were worth ₹ 22,840/-. The assignee-creditor, respondent no. 1 herein, opposed the application. When the application was pending before the Special Tahsildar the assignee creditor filed O.S. No. 123/81 on 25.4.1981 in the Sub-Court, Ramanathapuram, which was re-numbered as O.S. No. 150/81 on the file of Sub-Court, Srivilliputhur. 5. The Special Tahsildar, on inquiry came to the conclusion that the annual household income of the appellant's family during 1979 did not exceed ₹ 4,800/- and the value of the immovable properties did not exceed ₹ 25,000/-, and therefore, the appellant was entitled to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... or participated in the proceedings or he kept quiet without objecting to the jurisdiction had no significance, since it is a well settled principle of law that the jurisdiction cannot be conferred on authorities by mere consent of parties, where it is totally wanting and the statutory authorities could not claim to have jurisdiction to function under an Act, merely because the parties before them agreed to participate in the proceedings. For the same reason, we are of the view that the reliance placed on Section 7 of the Act and the finality given to the orders passed under the Act subject to the orders passed on appeal will not be of any help to the appellant where it is a case of absolute and total want of jurisdiction on the original authority. The order passed by the authority which suffered total want of jurisdiction would be a nullity and there is no question of attaching any finality to such an order. For all the reasons stated above, we see no merit in the above appeal. The appeal, therefore, fails and shall stand dismissed. 8. On the facts and circumstances discussed above the point formulated earlier arises for determination. 9. We have heard Mrs. Revathy Raghavan, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y the debtor and includes any subsequent transferee to whom such transferee has transferred or otherwise assigned his interest in the property mortgaged and also includes any person in possession of the property mortgaged. 14. Section 4 of the Act contains the provision regarding relief from indebtedness. It reads as follows: 4. Relief from indebtedness : (1) Notwithstanding anything contained in the Tamil Nadu Agriculturists Relief Act, 1938 (Tamil Nadu Act 1 of 1938), the Tamil Nadu Pawnbrokers Act, 1943 (Tamil Nadu Act XXIII of 1943) the Tamil Nadu Money-Lenders Act, 1957 (Tamil Nadu Act XXIV of 1957) the Tamil Nadu Debt Relief Act, 1972 (Tamil Nadu Act XXXVIII of 1972), the Tamil Nadu Debt Relief Act, 1976 (President's Act XXXI of 1976), the Tamil Nadu Debt Relief Act, 1979 (Tamil Nadu Act XL of 1979) or in any other law for the time being in force or in any contract or instrument having force by virtue of any such law and save as otherwise expressly provided in this Act, and in particular sub-section(2) with effect on and from the commencement of this Act. (a) every debt advanced or incurred before the first day of January, 1980 (including interest, if any) and pa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ess for an order for the return of the movable property pledged by the debtor. 16. In sub-section(2) of the said section power has been vested in the Tahsildar to pass an order after giving a reasonable opportunity to the creditor concerned and the debtor to make their representations for return of the immovable property pledged by the debtor if he is satisfied that the debtor is entitled to relief under section 4 and to pass an order dismissing the application if he is satisfied that the debtor is not entitled to such relief. 17. Under sub-section(3) it is laid down that where the Tahsildar has passed an order under sub-section(2) dismissing the application the creditor may subject to the provisions of sub-section (3) of section 8, dispose of in accordance with the provisions of the Tamil Nadu Pawnbrokers Act, 1943 (Tamil Nadu Act XXIII of 1943) or any other law for the time being in force relating to the sale of pledged articles, the movable property for the return of which the said application was made. 18. In clause (d) of sub-section(3) it is provided that where any debtor referred to in clause (e) of sub-section (1) of section 4, has not made any application in accor ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rt is accepted then it would be easy for a creditor to prevent the debtor form getting benefits granted under the Act by filing civil suit relating to the debt. On the other hand in section 4(b) a declaration is made that any Civil Court which entertain any suit or other proceeding against the debtor for recovery of any amount of such debt (including interest, if any); all suits and other proceedings (including appeals, revisions, attachments or execution proceedings) pending at the commencement of this Act against any debtor for the recovery of any such debt, (including interest, if any) shall abate. 21. The principle is well settled that an interpretation of the statutory provision which defeats the intent and purpose for which the statute was enacted should be avoided. The decision of the Madras High Court in K.V.S.P. Subramanian case (supra), holding that since the creditor had already filed suits for recovery of the mortgage amount and the suits were pending the debtor, who is the defendant in those suits, has to seek adjudication before the Civil Court on the question as to answer he is entitled to the benefit and if the Court comes to the conclusion that he is entitled to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
