Jagatnarayan, J. - (1.) THIS is an application in revision by one of the defendants in a suit for recovery of money.
(2.) THE suit was instituted on 11. 11. 1945. Issues were framed on 2. 3. 1962. Before the suit was decided, an application was made to the Debt Relief Court on 11. 10. 1962 under sec. 6 (1) of the Rajasthan Relief of Agricultural Indebtedness Act, 1957. This application was admitted on 13. 10. 1962. After its admission the debtor moved an application in the civil court for staying the proceedings. In this application it was mentioned that an application has already been moved under sec. 6 (1) before the Debt Relief Court. THE civil court declined to stay the proceedings. Against that order, the present revision application has been filed. The contention of the applicant is that his application was substantially one under sec. 5 (l) (i) of the Rajasthan Relief of Agricultural Indebtedness Act and the civil court had no alternative but to abate the suit. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties, I am satisfied that this contention must be up-held. Sec. 5 now runs as follows - "5. Abatement or Stay of suit or insolvency petition - (1) Whenever a suit or an insolvency petition against a debtor shall have been brought or made and pending in a competent court and such debtor or the person who brought or made such suit or petition applies to such court in this behalf, the court shall - (i) abate such [suit or petition if it is satisfied on affidavit or otherwise that an application to the Debt Relief Court under sec. 6 or sec. 6-A has been made and admitted and is pending, or (ii) stay proceedings in such suit or application if it is satisfied as aforesaid that the defendant or the opposite party, as the case may be, is a debtor within the meaning of this Act; Provided that, in the case of an application for stay under clause (ii), the court shall fix a period, not exceeding 90 days, within which the application to the Debt Relief Court shall be made. (2) If any such suit or petition as is referred to in sub-sec. (1) shall have been pending - (i) against a member of a Scheduled caste or a Scheduled Tribe, at the date of the applicability of this Act to such castes or tribes appointed under sec. 2a, and (ii) in other cases at the date of the commencement of this Act, an application for stay of proceeding under sub-sec. (1) may be made within six months of the date of such applicability or such commencement, as the case may be. " On behalf of the respondents, it is contended firstly that the application moved by the applicant before the civil court was one for stay and not for abatement and that an application for stay did not lie in view of Sub-sec. (2) of sec. 5 as it was not moved Within six months of the coming into force of the Rajasthan Relief of Agricultural Indebtedness Act, 1957. A distinction has been drawn between abatement and stay of proceeding in the Act as a perusal of sec. 5, sec. 6 and sec. 21 goes to show. Where an application has already been moved before the Debt Relief Court, the proceedings are to be abated. Where such an application has not been made the proceedings are to be stayed by the civil court. Sec. 6 (6) (ii) provides that a suit which has been stayed by the civil court shall be abated if an application has been moved before the Debt Relief Act and has been admitted. In the application moved by the applicant before the civil court it was stated that an application to the Debt Relief Court had already been made and had been admitted. The application was therefore substantially one asking the court to abate the suit. Sub-sec. (2) of sec. 5 is not applicable to an application for abatement. I accordingly allow the revision application, set aside the order of the learned District Judge and direct that the suit shall abate under sec. 5 (l) (i) of the Rajasthan Relief of Agricultural Indebtedness Act, 1957. In the circumstances of the case, I direct that the parties shall bear their own costs of this revision application. .;