Liberal construction of debt-relief law treats a compromise mortgage decree as a final sale decree and supports interest reduction.

A remedial debt-relief statute was construed liberally so that technical form did not defeat substance. A compromise decree that declared the amount due, was framed as a decree for sale, and required execution of a sale deed in satisfaction of a mortgage debt was treated as a final decree for sale within Section 5 of the U.P. Agriculturists' Relief Act, 1934. The underlying liability arose from mortgage loans, so the decree was also one passed on the basis of a loan and Section 30 applied to permit reduction of past interest. The subordinate court's amended decree was therefore restored.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether a compromise decree directing a sale of mortgaged property was a final decree for sale within Section 5 of the U.P. Agriculturists' Relief Act, 1934; (ii) Whether the decree was one passed on the basis of a loan so as to attract Section 30 of that Act for reduction of interest.

Issue (i): Whether a compromise decree directing a sale of mortgaged property was a final decree for sale within Section 5 of the U.P. Agriculturists' Relief Act, 1934.

Analysis: The decree expressly declared the amount due, was headed as a decree for sale, and incorporated the compromise by which the debtor was to execute a sale deed in satisfaction of the decretal amount. The absence of the usual preliminary decree did not change the substance of the transaction. A remedial statute was to be construed liberally so that the intended relief was not denied by technical form.

Conclusion: The decree was a final decree for sale and fell within Section 5 of the U.P. Agriculturists' Relief Act, 1934.

Issue (ii): Whether the decree was one passed on the basis of a loan so as to attract Section 30 of the U.P. Agriculturists' Relief Act, 1934 for reduction of interest.

Analysis: The underlying liability arose from mortgage loans, and the decree was founded on those loans. The statutory power under Section 30 extended to reducing past interest on decrees passed on the basis of such loans, not merely future interest. The relief granted by the subordinate court therefore answered the statutory description.

Conclusion: Section 30 applied, and the reduction of interest was lawful.

Final Conclusion: The order of the Chief Court was set aside and the subordinate court's amended decree was restored, with consequential relief to follow from the restored amendment.

Ratio Decidendi: A remedial debt-relief statute must be construed liberally, and a compromise decree that in substance effects a court-supervised sale in satisfaction of a mortgage debt is a final decree for sale within the statute.

---