Laxmi Abhyudaya Chit Funds ... vs S.V.Anand Rao Hyd
2022 Latest Caselaw 2633 Tel

            THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE M.LAXMAN

               SECOND APPEAL NO.1172 OF 2001

JUDGMENT:-

1.    The present Second Appeal has been filed aggrieved by

the judgment and decree dated 03.09.2001 in A.S.No.199 of

2000, on the file of the II Additional Chief Judge, City Civil

Court, Hyderabad, wherein and whereby the judgment and

decree dated 27.04.2000 passed in O.S.No.4882 of 1997, on the

file of the VI Additional Junior Civil Judge, City Civil Court,

Hyderabad, was confirmed and the said suit was filed for

recovery of amount of Rs.19,136.05/- with interest @ 24% and

the Courts decreed the suit granting the said amount with

interest @ 12% per annum from the date of the suit till the date

of decree and thereafter, 6% per annum till the amounts are

realized.


2.    The appellant is the defendant and the respondent is the

plaintiff in the suit. For the sake of convenience, the ranks of

the parties, as were referred in the suit, are maintained.

3. The short case of the plaintiff is that he was the

subscriber of the chit and after payment of a sum of

Rs.14,225/- he could not pay further and his membership was

ML,J SA.NO.1172 OF 2001

terminated by the defendant. In the course of termination, it

was stated that after the chit period is completed, he is entitled

to get back his amount. After chit period is completed, when

the amounts are not paid as undertook by the defendant and

when they unjustly retained the amount for inordinate time, the

plaintiff filed the present suit seeking recovery of principal

amount with interest till the date of filing the suit. The said suit

was allowed decreeing the suit amount with interest as stated

herein before.

4. The defendant did not deny the fact that plaintiff has

originally subscribed the chit and he paid the amount what

plaintiff claimed and also default and termination of

membership and their undertaking to pay the amount after the

chit period is completed. The main grievance of the appellant

herein is that the interest granted by both the Courts is

contrary to Section 34 of the Code of Civil Procedure. As per

Section 34 of C.P.C., for any suit for recovery of money arising

out of the non-commercial transaction, the interest during the

pendency of the suit is at the discretion of the Court and

thereafter, 6% was directed to be awarded. However, in respect

of commercial transactions, such embargo would not apply.

ML,J SA.NO.1172 OF 2001

5. In the present case, the transaction itself is a commercial

one and in fact, both the Courts had awarded less interest than

what the plaintiff is entitled. Therefore, I do not find any

substantial question of law in the present appeal and the appeal

is liable to be dismissed.

6. In the result, the Second Appeal is dismissed. In the

circumstances, there shall be no order as to costs.

7. Miscellaneous petitions, if any pending, shall stand

closed.

_____________________ JUSTICE M.LAXMAN Dt.13.06.2022 ysk

ML,J SA.NO.1172 OF 2001

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE M.LAXMAN

SECOND APPEAL NO.1172 OF 2001

Dt.13.06.2022

ysk