AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Thottathil B. Radhakrishnan, J.—The captioned application seeking condonation of delay of 425 days in filing the first appeal is by the State of Kerala, essentially challenging the impugned decree to the extent it imposed 6% interest on a particular amount, i.e., Rs. 3,62,586/-. We had noted this even in the order dated 24.9.2012 on the C.M. application. Heard learned Government Pleader and learned senior counsel for the respondent. Learned Government Pleader, touching on the merits, pointed out that in paragraph 6 of the impugned judgment, the court below has stated as follows:
My considered view is that plaintiff is entitled to get 6% interest only on the principal sum of Rs. 10,07,192/- from 8.11.99 (date of A3 judgment) till the date of suit. When calculated the interest for the said period at 6% p.a. for the above amount it will come to a tune of Rs. 3,62,586/-. So the total amount which the plaintiff is found entitled to realize from the defendants on the date of suit is Rs. 13,69,778/-. There is no doubt that plaintiff is entitled to realize the above amount from the defendant with interest @ 6% p.a. from the date of suit till realization.
On such basis he argues that there could not have been any duplication by adding 6% interest on the amount of Rs. 3,63,586/- after determining that as a component of interest.
Learned senior counsel for the respondent, in our view, has rightly placed reliance on the decision of the Apex Court in U.P. Cooperative Federation Ltd. Vs. Three Circles, to point out that there could be instances where courts may award interest on interest. Obviously, such award of interest would be guided by principles as to how and when such interest could be added on. Be that as it may, we do not find it necessary to go into any such question in this case.
A close reading of the afore-quoted portion of the judgment of the court below clearly shows that the learned Judge applied mind and came to the categorical conclusion that from the date of A3 judgment rendered by this Court in writ jurisdiction on 8.11.1999, the plaintiff was entitled to interest on Rs. 10,07,192/- at 6% till the date of the suit from which this appeal arises. The suit was instituted on 18.11.2005. Obviously therefore, the interest component calculated by the court below as Rs. 3,62,586/- is the interest component that runs on Rs. 10,07,102/- before suit, i.e., from the date of A3 judgment of this Court till the date of institution of the suit before the court below. Therefore, there is no illegality in that amount being merged in the otherwise payable amount and thereby treating the entire amount as the principal amount for award of interest, pendente lite, as well as post decree. Under such circumstances, we do not find any legal infirmity in the impugned judgment. The aforesaid position notwithstanding, we are not satisfied by the reasons stated in the affidavit filed in support of the application for condonation of the delay in filing the appeal. No reason worth cognizance as sufficient cause in terms of section 5 of the Limitation Act has been placed. On this ground also, this application fails.
In the result, C.M. Appl. 586/12 is dismissed. As a consequence, the appeal is rejected.