Word "Debt" - Indian Laws - General

As per Article 366(8) of the Constitution of India- debt includes- any liability in respect of any obligation to repay capital sums by way of annuities and any liability under any guarantee, and debt charges shall be construed accordingly; As per BLACK S Law Dictionary (6th Ed.) defines Debt as under : A sum of money due by certain and express agreement. A specified sum of money owning to the person from another, including not only obligations of debtor to pay but right of creditor to receive and enforce payment . A fixed and certain obligation to pay money or some other valuable thing or things, either in the present or in the future. In a still more general sense, that which is due from one person to another, whether money, goods or services. DAYA CHAND UTTAM PRAKASH JAIN- [ 1997 (3) TMI 623 - DELHI HIGH COURT ] In the case of Eureka Forbes Ltd. v. Allahabad Bank [ 2010 (5) TMI 379 - SUPREME COURT ] , while examining the interpretation and application of the word `debt , held that it was a generic term and, thus, of wide amplitude : language of section 2(g) of the Recovery Act ........... We may notice some of the general expressions used by the framers of law in this provision: a) any liability; b) claim as due from any person; c) during the course of any business activity undertaken by the Bank; d) where secured or unsecured; e) and lastly legally recoverable. All the above expressions used in the definition clause clearly suggest that, - expression `debt has to be given general and wider meaning, just to illustrate, the word `any liability as opposed to the word `determined liability or `definite liability or `any person in contrast to `from the debtor . The expression `any person shows that the framers do not wish to restrict the same in its ambit or application. The legislature has not intended to restrict to the relationship of a creditor or debtor alone. General terms, therefore, have been used by the legislature to give the provision a wider and liberal meaning. These are generic or general terms. Therefore, it will be difficult for the Court, even on cumulative reading of the provision, to hold that the expression should be given a narrower or restricted meaning. What will be more in consonance with the purpose and object of the Act is to give this expression a general meaning on its plain language rather than apply unnecessary emphasis or narrow the scope and interpretation of these provisions, as they are likely to frustrate the very object of the Act.