JUDGMENT :- Heard both the sides.

2. Rule, made returnable forthwith.

3. This revision petition is filed against the order passed by the Additional District Judge, Hingoli dismissing the appeal and confirming the judgment and order passed by the C.J.S.D., Hingoli decreeing the suit for recovery of the amount and directing the petitioner - defendant to pay the amount of Rs.95,625/- to the plaintiff along with future interest @ 15% per annum from the date of suit till the realization of the decretal amount.

4. The learned Counsel for the petitioner, at the outset, submitted that he is challenging only the direction to pay future interest @ 15% per annum. According to him, it is contrary to the provisions of Section 34 of the Code of Civil Procedure.

5. The factual matrix involved in the dispute shows that the plaintiff and the defendant are relatives of each other. The defendant wanted to take agency and servicing center of Bajaj M-80 at Hingoli. Hence he needed the amount. Being relatives of each other, the defendant demanded hand-loan of Rs.1,75,000/- for the period of two months. Upon repeated insistence, the plaintiff has given Rs.1,75,000/- to the defendant on 29-03-1995. With the h

Click Here to Read the rest of this document