Judgment

BHARGAVA, J.:- One Khanmull, whose legal representatives are the appellants in the present appeal, instituted Original Suit No. 59 of 1949-50 on 10th January, 1950 for recovery of amounts due to him on the basis of two simple mortgages dated 12th January, 1937 and 14th June, 1937 in the Court of the District Judge, Civil Station, Bangalore. Both these mortgages were executed by three brothers, Ahmed Saleh Mohamed Sait (since deceased), Elias Saleh Mohamed Sait (respondent No. 1), and Mohamed Saleh Mohamed Sait (respondent No. 2), while their mother Rahmatbai alias Bhayabai joined them in the execution of the mortgage deed of 14th June, 1937. In the suit in addition to respondents 1 and 2, Hajirabai widow of the deceased brother Ahmed Saleh Momamed Sait, and their sisters, Ameenabai and Haneefabai, were also impleaded as defendants 3, 4 and 5. Further, Khan Saheb Abdul Gani Saheb, and Khan Saheb Abdul Shakoor Saheb were impleaded as defendants 6 and 7 in their capacity of purchasers of the equity of redemption from the mortgagors. On the foot of the first mortgage, the amount claimed was Rs. 51,200/- as principal and interest, while on the foot of the second mortgage, the amount claimed as principal and interest was Rs. 60,200/-. The contractual rate of interest was 1 per cent per mensem. The trial Court decreed the suit on 27th March, 1952, after applying the provisions of Section 17 of the Mysore Money Lenders Act No. 13 of 1939 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act"). For the purpose of giving effect to the provisions of Sec. 17 of the Act, the trial Court held that the principal amount of the two loans was Rs. 44,000/-, being the aggregate of the consideration shown in the two mortgage deeds, and, consequently, allowed as arrears of interest the sum of Rs. 44,000/-. The preliminary decree was, therefore, granted for a sum of Rs. 88,000/, composed of Rs. 44,000/. as principal and Rs. 44,000/. as interest. The excess interest claimed at the contractual rate of 1 per cent per mensem was disallowed on the ground of the maximum limit for the grant of the total amount of interest laid down in Section 17 of the Act. Thereupon, both the parties filed appeals in the High Court of Mysore. The High Court held that the trial Court had wrongly treated the amounts of Rs. 20,000/- and Rs. 24,000/- as the principal amounts of the original loans, and recorded a finding that the principal amounts, in fact, were Rs. 15,017-8.0 in respect of the first mortgage-deed, and Rs. 22,954/- in respect of the second mortgage-deed. The High Court, thus, worked out the aggregate of Rs. 37,971.50 P. as the principal amount of the two loans advanced under these two mortgage deeds and, applying Section 17 of the Act, granted a decree for this amount as principal together with the same amount as interest. The High Court further held that this would be the arrears of interest to which the appellants would be entitled up to the date fixed for payment of the redemption money by the judgment of the High Court, that date being the 19th March 1959. The High Court also made a direction that the principal amount will carry interest at 6 per cent per annum from the date fixed for redemption till realisation. The appellants have now come up against this decree passed by the High Court by certificate granted by that Court.

2. In this appeal, Mr. Govinda Rao, learned Counsel for the appellants, raised only two points. The first point urged was that the High Court was wrong in re-opening the accounts in respect of loans prior to the two mortgage deeds which farmed the consideration for the two mortgage deeds in suit, and that the High Court should have held that the principal amount was Rs. 44,000/- for the two mortgages as decided by the trial Court. The second point urged by learned counsel was that the High Court was wrong in fixing the dates upto which the arrears of interest could be calculated for being included in the decree and for prescribing future rates