Kunhi Raman Ambalavasi vs Lekshmi Devi Ammal

Raman Nayar, J.—The decree under execution is admittedly one for arrears of rent (albeit on property covered by a possessory mortgage by the judgment-debtor to the decree-holder and taken back on lease by the former) and is prima facie taken out of the definition of "debt" in Section 2(c) of Act XXXI/58 by reason of the exception in sub-clause (ix) thereof. The learned Munsiff seems to have thought that Section 11(6) of the Act applied to make the possessory mortgage a simple mortgage with the result that the rent payable became interest to which all the provisions of the Act including Sections 3 and 4 applied. But in doing so, he failed to note that while the property mortgaged is two pieces of land with a building standing on one of them, the lease is only of the building and of a well attached to it. Therefore it cannot be said that "the property mortgaged has been leased back" so as to attract Section 11(6). It follows that the debt under the decree in question is not a debt within the meaning of the Act. I allow the petition with costs. The order of the lower court is set aside and that court is directed to proceed with the execution in accordance with law.