Amendment status not verified — confirm the current text below against the official source.
Notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force or in any contract or other instrument having force by virtue of any such law, and save as otherwise expressly provided in this Act, the conse-quences as hereinafter set forth shall, with effect from the date of commencement of this Act, ensue namely: (a) every debt advanced before the commencement of this act, including the amount of interest, if any, payable by a scheduled debtor to a creditor shall be deemed to be wholly discharged; (b) no such debt due from the scheduled debtor immediately before the commencement of this Act, shall be recoverable from him, or from or against any movable or immovable property, belonging to him, nor shall any such property be liable to be attached and sold or proceeded against in any manner in the execution of any decree or order relating to such debt against him; (c) no civil court shall entertain any proceeding against a scheduled debtor for the recovery of any amount of such debt, including interest, if any: Provided that where a proceeding is instituted jointly against a scheduled debtor and any other person, nothing in this clause shall apply to the maintainability of a proceeding in so far as it relates to such other person: (d) all proceedings (including appeals, revisions, attachment or execution proceedings) pending on the date of the commencement of this Act for the recovery of any debt against a scheduled debtor shall abate: Provided that nothing in this clause shall apply to the sale of- (i) any moveable property, held and concluded before the commencement of this Act: (ii) any immovable property, confirmed before such com-mencement; (e) every scheduled debtor undergoing detention in a civil prison in execution of any decree for money passed against him by a civil court in respect of any debt shall be released. Explanation.- Nothing in this Section shall be construed to entitle any scheduled debtor to the refund of any part of a debt already repaid by him or recovered from him before the commencement of this Act. C O M M E N T A R Y Debtor of other State also benefited. The interpretation of the Act should be such which is in consonance with the fundamental rights and directive principles and is not violative of it. The object to provide liquidation of indebtedness is wide enough to cover and merely because the preamble says in Rajasthan, it cannot mean that only of the rural population of Rajasthan and not of Madhya Pradesh or other States. It would therefore, interprete these provisions to make them harmonious to the directive principles of Art. 46 of the Constitution and further to be consistent with Art. 14 of the Constitution. So interpreted this Act of Rajasthan, whenever it is interpreted or applied in the Courts of Rajasthan, for the purposes of giving effect to the objects of the Act, would provide protection and benefit to all scheduled debtors who can legitimately prove that their case comes in that category even though their land may be situated in some other State so long as litigation is being conducted in the Courts of Rajasthan. The Constitutional mandate of Art. 46 read with Art. 14 is universally applicable for Indian Union from Kashmir to Kanyakumari and Kutch to Calcutta. It is the clarion call for equality before law which in terms inspires unity and integrity of the people, irrespective of place of birth or residence. This act of liquidation of debts of marginal farmers, who are poor and downtrodden and who have been suppressed, oppressed and repressed and consequently depressed on account of centuries of exploita-tion by landlords on the one hand and rich money lenders and creditors on the other hand, is to emancipate and release them from the above exploitation. It would, therefore, be not material to the economic status of the Indian citizen of marginal farmer as to which part of the country he resides, as the Rajasthan laws would liquidate his debts the moment they become subject matter of litigation of Rajasthan Courts. Thus interpreted, Jhabua's, marginal framer who has got the certificate of Tehsildar would be entitled to the protection of this Rajasthan Act. Sagarmul Vs. MIS Laxmi Vastra Bhandar AIR 1987 Raj 112 = 1987 RLR 110=1987(1) WLN 103.