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

2002 Supreme(Del) 1536

S.MUKERJEE
SANYUKT NIRMATA – Appellant
Versus
DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
PAVAN MATHUR, Sandip Sharma

S. Mukerjee

( 1 ) THE short point which arises for consideration in this case is whether the Judgment debtor/ DDA has satisfied the decretal amount which fell due under the decree.

( 2 ) THE position, as has crystalised between the parties, and as relied upon by both the learned counsel, is contained in Annexure A to the reply filed by delhi Development Authority to EA NO. 338/2000.

( 3 ) IT is admitted by Delhi Development authority that the award amount alongwith interest upto ex-P. No. 50/1999. the date of award, was Rs. 5,22,002. 62/-, which figure is also accepted by learned counsel for the Decree Holder.

( 4 ) THEREAFTER however while calculating the interest @ 12% for the period from 22. 1. 92 ( the day after the date of Award), till 17. 11. 99 (which was the date of deposit of amount in this Court), the Delhi development Authority went on to calculate the interest only on the awarded principal amount of Rs. 4,06,214. 58/-, and not upon the total awarded amount inclusive of interest upto the date of Award (viz. not on rs. 5,22,002. 62 ).

( 5 ) DUE to the above said difference in the base figure for computation of interest, an amount of rs. 1,17. 000. 00/- is still outstanding









Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
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 telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top