Mesne profits are not a statutory debt until quantified, so no stay applies under the debt relief scheme.

A pending mesne profits claim is not a "debt" under the Bengal Agricultural Debtors Act because the expression requires an existing, ascertainable liability in the ordinary legal sense. Mesne profits were treated as damages or compensation for trespass, and no debt arises until a final decree fixes a definite sum. The Act was read as dealing with specific, liquidated demands capable of being stated and settled before the Board. On that basis, the civil court was justified in refusing a stay under Section 34, since the claim was not within the class of debts contemplated by the statute.

---

---

Issues: Whether a claim for mesne profits pending ascertainment is a "debt" within the meaning of the Bengal Agricultural Debtors Act so as to attract a stay under Section 34.

Analysis: The expression "debt" under the Act was treated as requiring an existing liability of a debtor in the ordinary legal sense, not merely an unascertained or future claim. A mesne profits proceeding was viewed as one for damages or compensation for trespass, in which no debt arises until a final decree fixes a definite sum. The Act's scheme, including the provisions governing applications and statements of debt, was read as contemplating specific liquidated demands capable of being settled by the Board. The court also held that the liability in such a proceeding was not within the class of debts pending before the civil court when the notice under Section 34 was received.

Conclusion: A pending mesne profits proceeding is not a debt under the Bengal Agricultural Debtors Act, and the civil court was right in refusing to stay the proceeding.

---