Punjab-Haryana High Court
State Of Punjab And Others vs Bhag Singh on 15 April, 2024
Author: Harsimran Singh Sethi
Bench: Harsimran Singh Sethi
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:049926
RSA-3531-1997 (O&M) 2024:PHHC:049926
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
(209) RSA-3531-1997 (O&M)
Date of Decision : 15.04.2024
State of Punjab and others
...Appellants
Versus
Bhag Singh
...Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI
Present: Mr. Rohit Ahuja, Deputy Advocate General, Punjab
for the appellants.
***
Harsimran Singh Sethi J. (Oral)
1. In the present appeal, the challenge is to the judgment and
decree of the lower appellate court vide order dated 22.05.1997 by which
the judgment and decree of the trial court vide order dated 31.10.1995
was set-aside and the suit filed by the respondent-plaintiff, namely, Bhag
Singh was allowed.
2. The only argument raised by the learned counsel for the
appellant is that the rate of interest granted to the respondent-plaintiff was
contrary to Section 34 of the CPC, hence, the rate of interest is liable to
be reduced accordingly.
3. Despite information given to the learned counsel appearing
on behalf of the respondent, no one has appeared.
1 of 3
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:049926
RSA-3531-1997 (O&M) 2024:PHHC:049926
4. The interest on the arrears can only be granted keeping in
view the provisions of Section 34 of the CPC. Section 34 of the CPC is
reproduced as under :-
"Section 34. Interest.
(1) Where and in so far as a decree is for the payment of
money, the Court may, in the decree, order interest at such
rate as the Court deems reasonable to be paid on the
principal sum adjudged, from the date of the suit to the date
of the decree, in addition to any interest adjudged on such
principal sum for any period prior to the institution of the
suit, 1 [with further interest at such rate not exceeding six
per cent. per annum as the Court deems reasonable on such
principal sum], from the date of the decree to the date of
payment, or to such earlier date as the Court thinks fit :
2[Provided that where the liability in relation to the sum so
adjudged had arisen out of a commercial transaction, the
rate of such further interest may exceed six per cent. per
annum, but shall not exceed the contractual rate of interest
or where there is no contractual rate, the rate at which
moneys are lent or advanced by nationalised banks in
relation to commercial transactions.
Explanation I.--In this Sub-section, "nationalised bank"
means a corresponding new bank as defined in the Banking
Companies (Acquisition and Transfer of Undertakings) Act,
1970 (5 of 1970).
2 of 3
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:049926
RSA-3531-1997 (O&M) 2024:PHHC:049926
Explanation II.-- For the purposes of this section, a
transaction is a commercial transaction, if it is connected
with the industry, trade or business of the party incurring the
liability.]
(2) Where such a decree is silent with respect to the payment
of further interest 3[on such principal sum] from the date of
the decree to the date of payment or other earlier date, the
Court shall be deemed to have refused such interest, and a
separate suit therefore shall not lie."
5. Nothing has been brought to the notice of this court that the
bank rate was 12% per annum at the relevant time. In the absence of any
such evidence brought on record, the interest could not have been granted
@ 12% per annum, hence, the maximum interest, which can be granted
under Section 34 of the CPC i.e. 6% per annum should have been
extended.
6. Keeping in view the above, the judgment and decree of the
lower appellate court dated 22.05.1997 is modified to the extent that the
interest, which the respondent-plaintiff will get on arrears is @ 6%
instead of 12% as granted by the lower appellate court.
7. Pending miscellaneous application, if any, also stands
disposed of.
April 15th, 2024 (HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI)
kanchan JUDGE
Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No
Whether reportable : Yes/No
3 of 3
