NANU RAM VS. DEBT RELIEF CUM CIVIL JUDGE(S.D.),RAISINGHNAGAR & ORS. (S.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. 7018/07) 1 NANU RAM VS. DEBT RELIEF CUM CIVIL JUDGE(S.D.), RAISINGHNAGAR & ORS. (S.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. 7018/07) Dated:- 6.7.2009. HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SANGEET LODHA Mr. H.R.Chawla, for the petitioner. Mr.R.K.Singhal, for the respondents. 1. This writ petition is directed against order dated 29th August,07 passed by Additional District Judge, Raisinghnagar , whereby the revision petition preferred by the petitioner against the judgment and decree dated 4.3.06 passed by Debt Relief Court, Raisinghnagar allowing the application preferred by the respondent no. 2 for recovery of a sum of Rs.1,76,640/-, stands dismissed. 2. The respondent no. 3 filed an application under Section 6 (2) of Rajasthan Agriculture Debt Relief Act, 1957 ( in short “the Act of 1957” hereinafter) for determination of the debt, before the Debt Relief Court cum Civil Judge(S.D.), Raisinghnagar against the petitioner inter alia alleging therein that on 14.6.02, the petitioner had taken a loan of Rs.1,38,000/- from the respondent no. 3 and accordingly, pro note and receipt were executed. It was further alleged that the petitioner agreed to pay interest on the loan amount @ 2% per month. 3. The application was contested by the petitioner by filing a reply thereto, taking the stand that he had not taken any loan NANU RAM VS. DEBT RELIEF CUM CIVIL JUDGE(S.D.),RAISINGHNAGAR & ORS. (S.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. 7018/07) 2 from the respondent no. 3 and the documents produced i.e. the pro note and receipt are forged. It was further alleged that the respondent no. 3 has no capacity to advance the loan as claimed. 4. On the basis of the pleadings , the learned trial court framed the issues and parties to the proceedings led their evidence. After due consideration of the evidence on record, the Debt Relief Court allowed the application filed by the respondent no. 3 and vide judgment and decree dated 1.3.06 directed the petitioner to pay a sum of Rs.1,53,500/- in six yearly installments. 5. Aggrieved by the judgment and decree dated 1.3.06 passed by the Debt Relief Court, the petitioner preferred a revision petition before the District Judge,Sri Ganganagar u/s 17 of the Act of 1957, which later stood transferred to the Additional District Judge , Raisinghnagar. The revisional court has dismissed the revision petition vide order dated 29th August,07. Hence, this petition. 6. It is contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the revision petition has been dismissed by the revisional court without considering the contentions raised on behalf of the petitioner. The learned counsel submitted that the order impugned passed by the revisional court is a non speaking order NANU RAM VS. DEBT RELIEF CUM CIVIL JUDGE(S.D.),RAISINGHNAGAR & ORS. (S.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. 7018/07) 3 and therefore, deserves to be set aside on this count alone. 7. A bare perusal of the order impugned goes to show that the grounds raised by the petitioner assailing the finding arrived at by the Debt Relief Court have not been considered by the revisional court in their entirety and objectivity. The revisional court has merely recorded its ipse dixit that no illegality or irregularity is found in the judgment dated 1.3.06 passed by the trial court. In considered opinion of this court , the revisional court was under an obligation to record reasons in support of the decision arrived at. The cryptic order passed by the revisional court cannot be countenanced by this court and the practice of passing the final order without recording the reasons in support thereof deserves to be deprecated. The order impugned is not sustainable in the eye of law and deserves to be set aside. 8. In the result, the writ petition succeeds, it is hereby allowed. The order impugned dated 29th August,07 passed by the Additional District Judge, Raisinghnagar is set aside. The matter is remanded to the Additional District Judge, Raisinghnagar for decision afresh, after due consideration of the rival submissions of the parties, by passing a speaking order. The parties shall appear before the Additional District Judge, Raisinghnagar on 10th August,09. No order as to costs. (SANGEET LODHA),J.