AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Roe, J.—The appellant in this case is aggrieved by an order made u/s 144 declaring an auction purchaser entitled to receive from him, the decree-holder, not only the whole sum realised in an execution proceeding which has been set aside, but also interest at 6 per cent, per annum from the date of the withdrawal of the money. It appears that in order to safeguard the interests of the auction-purchaser in this case the learned District Judge directed that before this money be withdrawn the decree-holders do give security in a personal bond for the restoration of the sum which they were withdrawing.
It is contended that inasmuch as in the personal bond there was no provision for interest, the present District Judge cannot go outside the orders of his predecessor and add interest to the sum to be restored. In this contention there is no force. The bond cannot be held to limit the liability of the decree-holder; u/s 144 there is an express provision that the Court shall in its discretion award such interest as it chooses and the fact that the principal only is secured by the bond, does not affect the liability of the decree-holder to pay interest in accordance with that section. The appeal is dismissed with costs.
Chapman, J.
I agree.