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

1938 Supreme(Mad) 397

PANDRANG ROW
Kurella Ramamurti alias Sreeramulu – Appellant
Versus
Nalam Subbarao – Respondent


JUDGMENT

Pandrang Row, J.

1. The only point that arises in this case is whether the stipulation for payment of compound interest at the rate of 12 per cent, per annum found in the suit mortgage deed is in the nature of a penalty and ought to be relieved against. The mortgage deed provided that the sum of Rs. 2,000 which was borrowed thereunder should be repaid in eight annual instalments of Rs. 250 each, such instalments to count both towards principal as well as interest on the entire sum. The stipulation that is objected to runs as follows:

And that in default of payment of sums due in any instalment, the sum remaining unpaid on that date shall be added to the principal and the entire amount become payable at once irrespective of future instalments, the entire sum carrying interest at 1 per cent, per mensem compound with yearly rests.

2. There was, as it were, a double penalty put upon any default in payment of the annual instalments, namely, the entire sum will become immediately repayable irrespective of future instalments, and secondly interest had to be paid at one per cent, per mensem compound with yearly rests. The latter penalty is, in our opinion, a clear penalty which the pa


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