( 1 ) THE appellant original plaintiff Central Bank of India has preferred this appeal against the judgment and decree in so far as the trial Court has refused to decree the interest at the contractual rate of 16-12 per annum and against the quarterly instalment of Rs. 5 0 with interest due against the decretal dues of Rs. 9 23 521. 44

( 2 ) THE respondents-defendants are a private limited company and their two Directors have been held personally jointly and severally liable along with the Company because they have given personal guarantees. The defendants had executed several documents on 30/07/1977 for obtaining advances and credit facility one was letter of credit facility with a limit of Rs. 5 0 one was overdraft facility with a limit of Rs. 25 0 and the third was cash credit with a limit of Rs. 8 0 0 Thus there was a total credit facility upto the limit or Rs. 13 25 0 There were also personal guarantees executed by the defendants Nos. 2 and 3 for Rs. 13 25 0 with 16-1/2% interest per annum. On the date of the suit no amounts were due under the letter of credit facility and overdraft facility

( 3 ) AS per the statement of accounts produceed a sum of Rs. 9 23 521 44 was due and payable by the defendants as on 31/12/1979 and the statement of that account is at Exhs. 38 to 45 and from 1-1-1979 interest is due at the rate of 16-1/2% per annum. On behalf of the defendants. Defendant No. 2 Prafulchandra R. Shah had deposed at Exh. 71. He has stated that when he was the Director of defendant No. 1 Company the Factory was started in 1977 He has stated that his Garment Unit in the Kandla Free Trade Zone was facing financial difficulties. His brother defendant No. 3 was a Director of Kanti Cotton Mill which was closed before about a year. He has stated that the Unit had to incur huge debts. He has stated that defendants Nos. 2 and J have large family and social obligations and they have no other property except the factory of the Unit and the Kanti Cotton Mill and that his sons have no income of their own and they are dependent on them and they have got to be married and their marriage expenditure was required to be met and therefore it was prayed that small instalment may be granted and looking to the economic condition he prayed that instalment of Rs. 50 quarterly be granted. He also stated that he had his personal income of Rs. 20 to Rs. 2500/- and that he had cash deposit of about Rs. 100 to Rs. 1250 and that he was getting 12 interest on that amount and he was a member of Hindu Undivided Family in which there were total 7 members residing together and he did not have movable or immovable property. He has stated that defendant No. 3 was getting Rs. 5000. 00 per month when Kanti Cotton Mill was being run. He stated that he will not be in a position to say what instalment the defendant No. 3 could pay. The defendant No. 3 has not entered the witness box. He has not even appeared before this Court. He has not prayed for any instalment. He has not contested this appeal. Defendant No. 2 has admitted in the cross examination that it is true that there was contract with the Bank regarding rate of interest. As per the contract the rate of interest was at the rate of 16-1/2%. Inspite of that only a decree for the principal amount has been granted and against that there is no cross appeal or cross objection filed by any of them.

( 4 ) IT is curious and inexplicable as to why in such circumstances the secured loan of the Bank has been put to jeopardy for an incredibly long period. The learned Judge has granted quarterly instalment of Rs. 5. 000/ with interest due. It is not clear as to whether Rs. 5 0 includes interest. It is also not clear whether the defendant is required to pay every quarter Rs. 50 only inclusive of interest or Rs. 5 0 plus interest. Defendant No. 2 has clearly stated that he wanted instalment of Rs. 50 and he could pay Rs. 50 only per quarter and the learned Judge seems to have accepted the same without an