O. 34 of the Code is applicable to suits on mortgages in respect of immoveable properties only and not to suits on mortgages in respect of moveables. O. 20 R. 11 of the Code has its application to simple money decrees and not to decrees for sale of a property for realisation of money due. S. 34 of the Code leaves it to the discretion of the court as to what interest is to be decreed by way of interim interest and so far as interest on judgement is concerned that too is also left entirely to the discretion of the court but subject to a limit of b per cent.

( 1 ) THIS is an appeal by the plaintiff United Bank of India. It arises out of O. S. Suit No. 460 of 1983. The appeal is directed against the judgement and decree dated May 23, 1986 passed by a learned single Judge of this court. That decree had been passed partly in favour of the plaintiff but the plaintiff has felt aggrieved by the reduced interest - both interim and on judgement and by the installment's granted by the learned Judge in decreeing the plaintiff's claim.

( 2 ) THE plaintiff-appellant had lent and advanced various amounts to the defendant No. 1, The New Glencoe Tea Company Ltd. on hypothecation of moveable including the plants. machinery, stores, raw materials, finished and semi finished products etc. In 1983 the plaintiff instituted the above suit against the defendants for a decree for Rs. 58,41,677. 25, interim interest and interest on judgement at the rate of Rs. 18 per cent; for a declaration that moveable specified in the Schedule stand charged and/or mortgaged in favour of the plaintiff and a decree for sale thereof.

( 3 ) WHEN this suit came up for hearing before the learned trial Judge, it was found that pending the suit a sum of Rs. 26,28,647. 60 had been paid by the defendant No. 1, leaving a balance of Rs. 32,13,029. 65. Accordingly the learned trial Judge decreed the suit against defendant No. 1, for a sum of Rs. 32,14,000/- together with a sum of Rs. 5,50,000/- towards interim interest and interest on judgement at 7 per cent. He further directed payment of the decorate amount on installment's extending over 7 years and only on default of payment of three consecutive installments there will be a decree for sale. Plaintiff appellant has felt aggrieved by the fact that while the contractual rate of interest was 18% the interim interest and interest on judgement had been decreed at a rate not exceeding 7per cent and further by the fact that the decree providing for payment on installments has deferred sale of the moveable indefinitely beyond seven years.

( 4 ) MR. Amiya Nath Bose appearing on behalf of the appellant has contended that the present suit being one for realisation of an amount due on enforcement of a mortgage in respect of moveables, the learned trial Judge could not have reduced the decree for interim interest to a rate lower than the contractual rate and further he could not have granted instalment's for payment of the amount due and thus defer the decree for sale. According to Mr. Bose, procedure analogous to the procedure prescribed by O. 34 of the Code should have been followed and even if S. 34 of the Code could be invoked, it being a suit for enforcement of a commercial loan, the court should have decreed the interim interest and interest on judgement at a rate not other than the contractual rate. He has further contended that in such a suit, there could be no decree for installments in the matter of payment of the decretal amount. He has relied on a Bench decision of the Gujarat High Court in the case of Central Bank of India v. P. R. G. Industries Pvt. Ltd. AIR 1986 Guj 113.

( 5 ) MR. S. B. Mookherjee appearing on behalf of the defendant No. 1 respondent has contested the point raised by Mr. Bose. According to Mr. Mookherjee O. 34 of the Code lays down a procedure, only for suits on mortgages in respect of immovable properties and has no application to suits like the present one. He has contended that it being a suit for recovery of money due the court had ample authority to grant instalments under O. 20 R. 11 of the Code and grant reduced interest in terms of S. 34 of the Code.

( 6 ) WE have carefully considered the rival contentions put forward before us. We may well agree with Mr. Bose that under the Indian law there can be valid mortgage of moveables though such a mortgage may be different from such mortgage at English Common Law or under Bills of Sales Act. Such a mortgage when not accompanied by delivery of possession is still operative save and except agai