- (1.) This appeal raises an interesting point of law. The appeal is against an order of the learned Subordinate Judge dismissing an objection under Section 47 of the Code of Civil Procedure.
(2.) The matter arises in this way: On July 31, 1940, a decree was passed by the Court of Small Causes, Calcutta. The decree was for the total sum of under Section 2, 013-4 which includes costs. After the decree was passed the judgment-debtor on August 4, 1940, went to the Debt Settlement Board for settlement of this debt. The Board dismissed the said claim for default of the judgment-debtor on May 18, 1941. Thereafter, on August 6, 1952, an application for execution of the said decree was made. An objection was taken by the judgment-debtor that the application for execution was barred by limitation, the application having been made after the period of twelve years from the date after decree. It was contended on behalf of the decree-holders that the bar of limitation was saved by the provisions of Section 52 of the Bengal Agricultural Debtors Act. The learned Subordinate Judge upheld the contention of the decree-holders and dismissed the objection. It is against the order that the present appeal has been filed.
(3.) The question which arises for our consideration is whether or not Section 52 of the Bengal Agricultural Debtors Act is at all applicable to the present case. The said section reads as follows: Notwithstanding anything contained in any other Act, when the period of limitation is calculated for any application, suit or appeal regarding a debt which has been the subject of any proceedings under this Act, the time during which such proceeding continued and the time during which the person interested in such debt was debarred by any provision of this Act from making or instituting the application, suit or appeal, or executing the decree in question, as the case may be, shall be excluded.;