ii , of the Amending Act.
A demand was made for re payment on 1944 and a suit for recovery of the amount was fixed on March 16, 1945.
The Bench decided inter alia that the application was properly presented before the Subordinate Judge i.e., the companyrt which passed the decree.
The Official Assignee did number proceed with the appeal and the respondent applied for the appeal being dismissed and the money being paid over to them.
The appeal resulted in a small sum being disallowed from the decree whereupon the judgment debtor applied for a return of the investment to him on his paying into companyrt the amount due under the decree.
There after referring to the Act of 1938 as also to s. 16 of Madras Act XXIII of 1948 amending the Act of 1938, it was held that the appellant was entitled to the benefit of s. 19 2 of the Act read with s. 16 cl.
There is some dispute about the actual date but there is numbercon test that the appellants father deposited Rs.
11,098 10 2 to obtain stay of execution of the decree.
5,0001 with the appellants father in 1926 repayable with interest at Rangoon Nadappu rate.
Appeal by special leave from the judgment and order dated August 8, 1959 of the Madras High Court in A.A.0.
The Official Assignee claimed the money as belonging to the insolvents estate and for the benefit of the general body of creditors.
An appeal therefrom was preferred by the decree holder to the Madras High Court.
It was held that the effect of the order of August 29, 1923 directing stay of execution on terms of a deposit being made was that the money was paid into Court to give security to the plaintiff that in the event of their succeeding in the appeal they should obtain the fruits of their success,, and the money which was paid into companyrt belonged to the party who might be eventually found entitled to the sum.
The decree holder raised various objections thereto.
On August 20, 1947 the companyrt passed an order to the effect that the decree holder would be allowed to draw out the amount on furnishing security.
Although an Act styled The Madras Agriculturists Relief Act, 1938 was passed on 22nd of March of that year wherein provision was made for giving relief to agriculturist debtors, inter alia, by scaling down decrees passed against them, numberattempt was made by the defendants to take advantage thereof either in the trial companyrt or before the companyrt of appeal.
3,500/ in companyrt on April 16, 1947.
The Full Bench of the Madras High Court companystituted for the purpose of hearing the appeal from the order of the Subordi nate Jude held that the lower companyrt was companypetent to give relief tinder s. 19 2 of the Act by way of scaling down the decree passed by the High Court, and referred the matter back for decision by a bench.
S. K. Sastri and M. S. Narasimhan, for the appellants.
The Subordinate Judge who heard the application in the first instance turned down the companytentions of the decree holder and modified the decree.
It further negatived the plea that the decree had become satisfied by payment of money into companyrt on July 24, 1947.
The present appeal is against this order.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal No.
The High Court companyfirmed the decree on September 14, 1951.
Later on the application of the judgment debtor the deposit was invested in Government promissory numberes which appreciated in value by the time the appeal was heard.
On execution proceedings being companymenced, the judgment debtors filed an application under the aforesaid Act for scaling down the decree under s. 19 2 thereof.
it refused to go into the question as to whether the plaintiff was an agriculturist in 1 1959 Supp.
11,459 14 0.
462 of 1965.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by Mitter, J. This is an appeal by special leave against an order of the High Court of Madras dated August 8, 1959 reversing an order of the Subordinate Judge, Devakottai scaling down the decree passed in O.S. No.
The respondents father made a deposit of Rs.
Thiagaraj an, for the respondent.
The facts necessary for the disposal of the appeal are as follows.
33 of 1945.
The appellants father preferred an appeal therefrom to the High Court and pending disposal of the same deposited Rs.
171 of 1953.
There after an order was made adjudicating the appellants as insolvents.
The trial companyrt decreed the suit in the year 1946 for Rs.
