Urmila Devi vs The State of Bihar and Others

Barin Ghosh, J.—Heard. Statutory Explanation (n) to Section 73 of the contract that provides that if A contracts to pay a sum of money to B on a day specified but A does not pay the money on that day and in consequence of not receiving the money on that day, B is unable to pay his debts, and is totally ruined, A is not liable to make good to B anything except the principal sum he contracted to pay, together with interest up to the date of payment.

In the instant case under a scheme, the petitioner was entitled to receive stipend month by month. That was not paid and hence, the petitioner approached this Court by filing the present writ petition seeking a mandamus to pay to the petitioner the amount of money to which he is entitled to together with interest. In terms of the said statutory explanation, it appears to me that the petitioner is entitled to interest on the amount. Let such interest @ 9% be paid to the petitioner, inasmuch as the principal amount of stipend has already been paid to the petitioner. Let such interest be calculated and paid to the petitioner within a period of three months from today.