The bank's unjust withholding of funds and the determination of the applicable interest rate based on the bank manager's testimony influenced the court's decision.

This appeal by the plaintiffs is directed against the decree of learned Civil Judge, Senior Division, Vasco-da-Gama refusing interest on the sum of Rs.11,55,433.42 which the learned Judge ordered the defendants to pay to the plaintiffs.

2. The facts, which are material for deciding this appeal are mostly not in dispute or cannot be disputed.

3. There was Special Civil Suit No.157/1982 between the brothers and daughters of Narhari Narvekar. The defendants in that suit, are the plaintiffs in the present suit. In that suit, a receiver was appointed. Initially, Advocate Shirsat was appointed as receiver. Thereafter, Advocate Surendra Dessai was appointed in his place and lastly, Shri Sandesh Naik was appointed as receiver. These receivers maintained a current account with the defendant State Bank of India in which a sum of Rs.11,55,453.42 was lying. The parties filed consent terms in the said suit and the suit was decreed in accordance with those consent terms. The plaintiffs in the present suit, who were the defendants in Special Civil Suit No.157/1982 were to get 58 % of the amount in deposit. Clause 3(c), 4 and 5 of the consent terms read as under:

“3(c) It is further clarified that in Misc. Civil Appln. No. 110/82 in Special Civil Suit No. 157/82, the defendants as per the Court's suggestion offered to deposit in the bank to the order of the Court, the amount corresponding to 42%, with a clarification that the said figures are not final and they are subject to payment of tax and other liabilities and also that the figures are approximate as accounts were not finalised. The deposit aforesaid was permitted to be done in Bank of India Margao Branch on short term fixed deposits by order dated 25/01/1983. At that time the defendants had not appropriated nor were they paid any amount towards their share. Hence the amount deposited in the bank with its further proceeds is to be paid being 42% to the plaintiffs and 58% to the defendants in the same manner as shown in clause 5 of these consent terms.

4. As to the present Receiver Shri Sandesh Naik, appointed by the order dated 6/5/1998, the Receiver be and is hereby discharged forthwith without passing accounts, and informed accordingly.

(i) The Receiver was appointed in respect of the mines (i)”Pandava Xetaviola Soddo” or “Vozro Soddo”, (ii) “Mainantli Murdi”, (iii)”Mata Nacional Telsai”, (iv) “Palitembo E. Earqueriz”, (v) “Ambealidoe Curs l modi”, (vi) “Vacatil Temcudi”,

(vii) “Era Vanganavorli Murdi” all situated within the State of Goa and the Mines Adangaon, Khodli, Pissossa, Bhatkal, situated within the State of Karnataka.

(ii) The parties are agreed that all the tax liabilities in regards to the said mining leases and mining concessions have been cleared up to 31/3/98 in view of K.V.S. Scheme.

(iii) In respect of further period, returns have been filed, advance tax has been paid but up to now assessment has not been done.

(iv) In respect of payments made under K.V.S. Scheme, amounts which were earlier paid to Income Tax Department are recoverable from the said Income Tax department and accordingly after the receipt thereof they shall be paid 42% to the Plaintiffs and 58% to the Defendants in the same manner as provided in clause 5 of these consent terms.

5. In consideration of the claims given up by the Plaintiffs in the suit, it is hereby agreed, ordered and decreed that the net amount lying with the present Receiver Shri Sandesh Naik shall be paid forthwith to the parties in the following manner:-

(i) 12% of the amount to the Applicant no.1 and now his legal representatives.

(ii) 12% of the amount to the Applicant no.2 and now his legal representatives.

(iii) 12% of the amount to the Applicant no.3 and now his legal representatives.

(iv) 6% of the amount to the respondent no.6.

(v) the balance amount shall be paid over to the respondent nos.1 to 5 in equal shares.

(vi) The application presented by Receiver in Misc. Civil Application No. 72/2000 which is p