JUDGMENT :

Rajnish Kumar, J.

1. Heard, Shri Rajeev Kumar Sinha, learned counsel for the plaintiff-appellant and Dr. Ravi Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for the defendant-respondents.

2. This second appeal under Section 100 of Civil Procedure Code (here-in-after referred as CPC) has been filed against the judgment and decree dated 3.9.2011 passed in Civil Appeal No. 52 of 2007 (Zila Ganna Utpadadak Sahkari Samiti Ltd. Hardoi v. Union of India and another) by the Additional District Judge, Court No. 6, Hardoi and Judgment and decree dated 10.4.1995 passed in Regular Suit No. 144 of 1993 (Zila Ganna Utpadadak Sahkari Samiti Ltd. Hardoi v. Union of India and another) by the Civil Judge, (Senior Division), Hardoi and to pay the maturity amount mentioned on the face of National Savings Certificate (here-in-after referred as NSC) i.e. Rs. 3,02,250/- alongwith 14% interest during pendency of the suit and appeal with cost as claimed by the plaintiff-appellant. The defendant-respondents have also filed a cross objection alongwith C.M. Application No. 56905 of 2013 in this second appeal for dismissing the appeal with cost and to set-aside the judgment and decree dated 3.9.2011, so for it relates to the payment of interest @ 6% per annum from the date of filing of the suit till the date of actual payment.

3. This appeal has been admitted on the following substantial questions of law:

“I. Whether the learned lower Court committed the substantial error of law, not considering the law propounded in the case of U.P. Forest Corporation v. Union of India and other, in Writ Petition No. 4393 of 1990 dated 10.9.1996. The said judgment also relates to VI Issue of National Saving Certificate which was issued in the name of Institution ignoring the Court below even though the Court below is duty bound to follow the judgment dated 10.9.1996, passed in Writ Petition No. 4393 of 1990?

II. Whether the appellant made the specific plea in the plaint and claimed the interest 14% per annum for the entire period of Suit, was pending. The law propounded by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Mahesh Chandra Bansal v. Krishna Swaroop Singhal, (1997) 10 SCC 681. The learned Court below should have awarded the interest of 14% and also awarded the amount mention in the National Saving Certificate but the Court below committed the grave error not awarded the relief as claimed by the appellant ?

III. Whether the respondents promised to pay the amount mentioned in the National Saving Certificate, invested amount was utilised, respondents entered into the contract and the said mistaken credit account is bound to re-pay or return the amount in view of contract. They would be liable to pay the interest under the Interest Act till the date of filing the Suit and further pay interest till date of realisation under Section 34 C.P.C. The learned Court below committed the grave error not following the above principle and partly allowed the appeal?”

4. Learned counsel for the plaintiff-appellant submitted that the plaintiff-appellant invested an amount of Rs. 1,50,000/- on 27.9.1984 in VIth issue of NSCs. According to the maturity amount mentioned on the said NSCs an amount of Rs. 3,02,250/- was to be paid on maturity on 19.9.1990, but the said amount was not paid on maturity, therefore, after notice under Section 80 CPC the plaintiff-appellant filed a suit for recovery of the said amount but the suit was dismissed without considering the pleadings, evidence and records, therefore, the plaintiff-appellant filed the civil appeal. The civil appeal has been partly allowed and decreed. But the learned Courts below have failed to consider that NSC can be issued in the name of society and the plaintiff-appellant society had rightly invested in the same on behalf of its members in accordance with law and there was no illegality or error in it, therefore, the plaintiff-appellant is entitled for the maturity amount as per the terms and conditions of NSC.

5. He further submitted that the issue