Research › Browse › Judgment

Calcutta High Court · body

1941 DIGILAW 258 (CAL)

Meerza Nurul Haque v. Mohinimohan Chowdhury

1941-11-13

body1941
JUDGMENT 1. In our opinion this appeal should be dismissed. The Bengal Agricultural Debtors Act is operative only in the Province of Bengal and no notice under sec. 34 of the Act issued by Debt Settlement Board in Bengal, can be binding on any Civil Court functioning outside the Province. Under sec. 21 of the Assam Act, (The Assam Debt Conciliation Act, No. X of 1936), it is only when an application has been made to a Board under sec. 4 of the Act that any suit or other proceeding, then pending before a Civil Court in respect of any debt for the settlement of which the application was made, can be suspended. The present application could not have been one made under sec. 4 of the Act, because it was not made to a Debt Conciliation Board established under sec. 3. We think that the Court below was right in holding that the Munsif was at liberty to ignore the notice issued by a Debt Settlement Board of Bengal under sec. 34 of the Bengal Agricultural Debtors Act. The result is that the appeal is dismissed with costs-hearing-fee being assessed at one gold mohur.