Telangana High Court
Y Vijay Kumar vs U. Rajeshwar on 10 August, 2022
Bench: P.Sree Sudha
HON'BLE Smt. JUSTICE P.SREE SUDHA
CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.337 of 2022
ORDER
1. This revision petition is directed against the docket order
dated 20.09.2021 passed in E.P.No.172 of 2018 on the file of
the learned I Additional Chief Judge, City Civil Court,
Secunderabad, whereby the learned Judge adjourned the matter
to 22.10.2021 since the stay granted by this Court in I.A.No.2 of
2018 in I.A.No.1 of 2018 in CCCA No.106 of 2018 is pending.
2. The petitioner herein is the decree-holder in the above
E.P. He filed a suit in O.S.No.192 of 2009 for recovery of an
amount of Rs.45,30,000/- together with interest at the rate of
18% per annum and it was decreed by the trial Court on
18.01.2018. The respondent herein preferred an appeal before
this Court in CCCA No.106 of 2018 along with an application
vide I.A.No.1 of 2018 seeking to grant of stay. This Court, by its
order dated 13.04.2018 granted stay subject to the appellant
furnishing immovable property security for the value equivalent
to 50% of the decretal amount to the satisfaction of the trial
Court within in four weeks. Thereafter, the respondent herein
filed an application in I.A.No.2 of 2018 seeking for vacation of
the order dated 13.04.2018 passed in I.A.No.1 of 2018 in CCCA
No.106 of 2018. This Court, after hearing both sides, modified
the order dated 13.04.2018 passed in I.A.No.1 of 2018 to the
following effect "Pending disposal of the appeal, there shall be
stay of all further proceedings pursuant to the judgment and
decree dated 18.01.2018 in O.S.No.192 of 2009 on the file of the
learned XX Additional Chief Judge, City Civil Court,
Secunderabad, subject to the appellant depositing 50% of the
decretal amount along with costs to the credit of the said suit
within a period of eight (08) weeks from the date of the order
and on such deposit, the security furnished by the appellant
pursuant to the order dated 13.04.2018 in I.A.No.1 of 2018
shall be released." Thereafter, the petitioner herein filed I.A.No.1
of 2019 seeking permission to withdraw the amount and it was
allowed on 22.01.2020. The petitioner herein filed a calculation
memo in E.P.No.172 of 2018 and he has shown the decretal
amount at Rs.41,00,358/-. The respondent herein filed another
calculation memo by showing the 50% of the decretal amount to
Rs.48,50,812.31/-. The decree holder has calculated interest @
12% per annum from 28.10.2009 till 18.01.2018 on
Rs.45,30,000/- and 6% per annum from 18.01.2018 till
04.11.2019 on Rs.30,00,000/- and thus the total decretal
amount comes Rs.93,30,908.62/- and 50% of its comes to
Rs.46,65,454.31/- and apart from that the judgment debtor has
to pay Rs.1,85,358/- towards costs. The I Additional Chief
Judge, in his docket order uphold the calculation memo filed by
the judgment debtor and accepted the deposit of Rs.41,00,358/-
. Aggrieved by the said calculation, the decree holder preferred
this revision.
3. The operative portion of the decree reads as follows:
"1. that the suit is hereby decreed with costs
against the defendant and the defendant is liable to pay
Rs.45,30,000/- towards the suit amount, with interest @
12% P.A. from the date of suit to till date of decree; and
interest @ 6% P.A., from the date decree to till date of
realisation on the principal sum of Rs.30,00,000/-.
2. The Defendant do pay Rs.1,85,358/- to
plaintiff towards the costs of the suit."
4. Therefore, the calculation memo filed by the judgment
debtor is correct and requested the Court to set aside the docket
order of the trial Court dated 20.09.2021.
5. This Court heard both sides and perused the operative
portion of the judgment in O.S.No.192 of 2009 and also the
order in E.P.No.172 of 2018 in which the trial Court held that
as per Section 34 CPC Court considered awarding of interest @
12% per annum from the date of suit to till the date of decree
and thereafter @ 6% per annum from the date of decree to till
the date of realisation on the principal amount of
Rs.30,00,000/- only and as such calculation memo filed by the
judgment debtor is correct.
6. The calculation memo filed by the decree holder against
Rs.45,30,000/- which includes principal plus interest till the
date of filing of the suit. Without any specific finding in the
judgment, the decree holder cannot add interest accrued on the
principal sum and claim interest on such total sum which
amounts to paying of compound interest and accordingly held
that the calculation memo filed by the decree holder on
04.11.2019 is not sustainable.
7. Perusal of the order of the trial Court shows that the suit
was decreed for an amount of Rs.45,30,000/- towards suit
amount with interest @ 12% per annum and interest 6% per
annum from the date of decree till realisation on the principal
sum of Rs.30,00,000/-. The argument of the decree holder is
that when the trial Court specifically stated to pay 12% interest
on Rs.45,30,000/-, the calculation of the judgment debtor on
the principal amount of Rs.30,00,000/- is patently erroneous
and cannot be accepted.
8. Admittedly, suit is filed for recovery of Rs.30,00,000/-
which is a principal amount along with interest and as such the
interest @ 12% and 6% to be calculated on the principal amount
but not on the suit amount as claimed by the decree holder. The
trial Court after considering the arguments of both sides rightly
upheld the calculation memo filed by the judgment debtor and it
needs no interference.
9. In the result, the civil revision petition is dismissed.
10. Miscellaneous Petitions, if any, pending in this revision
shall also dismissed in the light of this final order.
____________________
P.SREE SUDHA, J.
10th AUGUST, 2022.
PGS
