SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

1990 Supreme(Cal) 96

High Court Of Calcutta
Bimal Chandra Basak, Amarabha Sengupta
VIJAYA BANK - Appellant
Versus
ART.TEND EXPORTS AND PEERLESS PLASTICS INDUSTRIES - Respondent
Appeal 900  Of  1988
Decided On : 02/28/1990

Discretion of the court in granting interest, interim interest, interest on judgment and instalments in money suits.

Headnote:

Interest, interim interest, interest on judgment and instalments to be granted, if any, and the rate thereof in money suits are matters of discretion. The court has to exercise such discretion judicially, upon consideration of all the attending facts and circumstances of a given case, including the conduct of the parties before and after the suit. While exercising such discretion, the court should generally adhere to the interest at the contract rate unless it is not considered to be equitable to do so.

Fact of the Case:

Several appeals were filed by banks challenging decrees passed by trial courts in various suits instituted by them for recovery of huge amounts due from their constituents on account of moneys lent and/or advanced by the banks.

Finding of the Court:

The question of interest, interim interest, interest on judgment and instalments to be granted, if any, and the rate thereof in money suits are matters of discretion. The court has to exercise such discretion judicially, upon consideration of all the attending facts and circumstances of a given case, including the conduct of the parties before and after the suit. While exercising such discretion, the court should generally adhere to the interest at the contract rate unless it is not considered to be equitable to do so.

Issues: Whether the court has discretion in the matter of granting interest, interim interest, interest on judgment and instalments; if so, the principles to be followed in exercising such discretion.

Ratio Decidendi: The court has discretion in the matter of granting interest, interim interest, interest on judgment and instalments. Such discretion is to be exercised judicially upon consideration of all the attending facts and circumstances of a given case. The court should generally adhere to the interest at the contract rate unless it is not considered to be equitable to do so.

Final Decision: The appeals were disposed of in accordance with the principles laid down by the court.

BIMAL CHANDRA BASAK, J.

( 1 ) THESE appeals are directed against a decree passed in favour of various banks, mostly nationalised banks, in various suits instituted by them for money decrees on account of amounts lent or advanced by them and for other reliefs.

( 2 ) SOME important questions of law are raised before us in connection with these suits which also arise in various other proceedings of this nature from time to time. The questions involved relate to (a) the interest for the period prior to the institution of the suit ; (b) interim interest, that is, interest from the date of the institution of the suit till the date of the decree ; (c) further interest, i. e. , interest on judgment ; and (d) instalments to be granted, if any, for payment of the decretal amount.

( 3 ) VARIOUS suits were instituted in this court by different nationalised banks for recovery of huge amounts due from their constituents on account of moneys lent and/or advanced by the banks. In these cases, money decrees were passed. The court also directed interest to be paid under three headings as specified above. The courts have also granted instalments. In all these cases, it is the banks who have preferred appeals, though the decrees have been passed in their favour, being aggrieved by the court's directions regarding interest and also the instalments granted for payment of the decretal dues. All these appeals involve such common questions of law relating to the same.

( 4 ) AT the request of learned advocates for the parties, all these appeals were set down for hearing together and learned advocates appearing for different parties in different appeals have made submissions before us on these points very thoroughly. It was agreed that we should first lay down the general principles applicable in respect of the aforesaid questions after hearing the interested parties, as a form of guideline which would be common to all these cases and, thereafter, we shall deal with each and every individual case depending on the facts and circumstances of each case. Accordingly, these appeals were heard together for a considerable time and judgment was reserved.

( 5 ) WE may, however, make one thing clear. We are dealing with general principles applicable to money suits relating to all these questions where, in some cases, there are also prayers for declaration of charge relating to movables with a prayer for sale of the same. We are not, in this judgment, dealing with mortgage suits where a preliminary decree is passed or redemption suits. We are not also dealing with these questions in respect of other proceedings, e. g. , arbitration proceedings.

( 6 ) THE main submission on behalf of the appellant-banks was made by learned advocate, Mr. Pratap Chatterjee. His submission was to the following effect. He has submitted at first that, so far as interest for the period prior to the suit is concerned, it must be directed to be paid at the agreed rate and the court has no option or discretion in the matter. So far as interim interest is concerned, our attention has been drawn to the relevant provisions of Section 34 of the Civil Procedure Code (hereinafter referred to as "the Code"), the Usury Laws Repeat Act, 1855 (hereinafter referred to as "the 1855 Act") and Section 21a of the Banking Regulation Act, 1949. At the first instance, it was submitted by Mr. Chatterjee that the court must grant interim interest at the agreed rate in view of the provisions of the 1855 Act. It was submitted that Section 34 of the Civil Procedure Code applies only when there is no rate of interest agreed upon. He has admitted that the proviso to Section 34 applies only in respect of interest on judgment and that it is not attracted in the case of interim interest. He has submitted that if there is any agreement regarding interest, the 1855 Act would apply and not Section 34 but if there is no such agreement, Section 34 of the Code would apply. It was conceded that Section 3 of the 1855 Ac






























































































Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

AI

SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top