IMPORTANT POINT
The court established that the discretion to award interest under Section 34 of the CPC must be exercised judiciously, considering prevailing economic conditions.

JUDGMENT :

Venuthurumalli Gopala Krishna Rao, J.

1. The appeal is filed by the appellant/defendant in O.S.No.78 of 1990 on the file of the Principal Senior Civil Judge’s Court, Eluru. The respondent herein is the plaintiff in the said suit.

2. Both the parties in the appeal hereinafter referred to as the parties that were referred before the trial Court.

3. The plaintiff filed the suit for recovery of suit claim of Rs.61,830/- with subsequent interest thereon.

4. In a nutshell, the brief averments of the plaint are as follows:-

The plaintiff lent an amount of Rs.45,000/- to the defendant by way of Demand Draft No.60600 dated 31.03.1987 of District Cooperative Central Bank Limited, Bazar Branch, Eluru, drawn in favour of the defendant and handed over the same to the defendant and the defendant promised to repay the aforesaid amount along with interest at the rate of 18% per annum. But the defendant failed to repay the same to the plaintiff. The plaintiff got issued a Legal Notice dated 11.10.1989 to the defendant.

5. The defendant issued a reply notice with false allegations that the defendant is not entitled the benefits of Agricultural Debt Relief Acts and he is a businessman (Income Tax Assesse) and that the plaintiff filed the suit for recovery of the suit debt along with subsequent interest and with costs.

6. The brief averments of the written statement, filed by the defendant, are as follows:-

7. The defendant borrowed an amount of Rs.45,000/- dated 31.03.1987 with interest at the rate of 12½% per annum, under a Demand Draft No.60600 from the husband of the plaintiff but not from the plaintiff and that he paid away the said amount along with interest, in total, an amount of Rs.48,375/-, to the husband of the plaintiff under a receipt dated 31.08.1987. He further pleaded that he does not know the plaintiff until receipt of the Registered Legal Notice and he issued a reply notice with correct facts and the husband of the plaintiff got filed the suit through the plaintiff, as the disputes arose between him and the husband of the plaintiff, in connection with the participation in Eluru Municipal Market Auction for the year 1988-89 and also he is not an Income Tax Assesse. The defendant entitled to claim the benefits of Act IV of 1938 and he pray Court to dismiss the suit.

8. Based on the above pleadings, the trial Court framed the following issues are for trial:

(1) Whether the amount covered by D.D.No.60600 for Rs.45,000/- was lent by plaintiff’s husband?

(2) Whether the discharge pleaded by defendant is true and binding on the plaintiff?

(3) To what relief?

9. During the course of trial, on behalf of the plaintiff, the plaintiff examined herself as P.W.1 and got examined 5 witnesses as P.Ws.2 to 6 and marked as Ex.A-1 to A-5. On behalf of the defendant, D.WS.1 to 3 were marked and got exhibited Ex.B1. During the cross examination of P.W.2, Exs.X1 and X2, thorough P.W.3, Exs.X3 to X6 and through P.W.5, Exs.X7 to X19 documents were marked.

10. After full-fledged trial, the trial Court decreed the suit in favour of plaintiff and against the defendant. Aggrieved by the said decree and judgment, the defendant therein preferred the present appeal.

11. Heard Sri Srikanth, learned counsel representing on behalf of Sri Y. V. Ravi Prasad, learned Senior Counsel for the appellant and Sri Srinivasa Basava, learned counsel representing on behalf of Smt. Bobba Vijaya Lakshmi, learned counsel for the respondent.

12. Now, the point for determination is:

(1) Whether the trial Court is justified in decreeing the suit?

POINT:- 13.

The case of the plaintiff is that the defendant requested the plaintiff to lend an amount of Rs.45,000/-. On considering the request made by the defendant, the plaintiff lent an amount of Rs.45,000/- to the defendant under a Demand Draft No.60600 dated 31.03.1987, drawn on District Cooperative Central Bank Limited, Bazar Branch, Eluru. It is the specific case of the defendant that he borrowed the said amount from the husband of the p