Short Note : 1. This revision is directed against the order dated 24-2-1976 passed by the learned Civil Judge, Class I, Neemuch in S. C. Execution Case No. 81 of 75, whereby the proceedings in execution of the money decree were treated to have been withdrawn in consequence of the enactment of section 4 of the Madhya Pradesh Gramin Rin Vimukti Tatha Rin Sthagan Adhiniyam, 1975 (for brevity the Adhiniyam) and the execution was dismissed. 2. Held : According to section 3 (g) (ii) of the Adhiniyam 'marginal farmer' means an agriculturist who in case of a person other than a member of Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe, holds an agricultural land not exceeding half hectare of irrigated or one hectare of unirrigated land and who cultivates personally such land. The non-applicant in his application had stated that he had only 4 Bighas of unirrigated land and that his main source of income was agriculture and agricultural labour. When the applicant had denied these facts, the Executing Court ought to have made an enquiry into the matter and come to a definite finding. It appears, that the Executing Court simply disbelieved the applicant's affidavit in which it was stated that the non-applicant carried on the business of the supply of lime and held that he was a marginal farmer. The approach of the Court below was wholly erroneous. The Adhiniyam is enacted to provide for relief from indebtedness to members of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes, small and marginal farmers, landless agricultural labourers and rural artisans in rural areas and, thus, it has curtailed valuable rights of the creditors. Thus, in order to give relief under the Adhiniyam, the Court of law should be very careful to find out by giving proper opportunity to parties whether a particular debtor is governed by the Adhiniyam so as to claim benefit thereunder. I am, therefore, of the view that the Court below has exercised the jurisdiction, in passing the impugned order, with material irregularity and hence it must be set aside. Revision allowed.