* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI
% Date of Decision : December 02, 2008
+ RFA 721/1994
Corporation Bank ..... Appellant
Through: Ms.Sumati Anand, Adv.
versus
M/s.Aircon Electronics ..... Respondent
Through: Nemo.
CORAM:
Hon'ble Mr.Justice Pradeep Nandrajog
Hon'ble Mr.Justice J.R. Midha
1. Whether reporters of local papers may be allowed
to see the judgment?
2. To be referred to the Reporter or not?
3. Whether judgment should be reported in Digest?
: PRADEEP NANDRAJOG, J. (Oral)
1. Learned counsel for the appellant urges a limited point,
being that, there is no reason why interest from 29.12.1985, pre suit,
pendente lite and future has not been awarded against
defendants No.3 to 5 of the suit being respondents No.3 to 5 in the
appeal.
2. We note that vide impugned judgment and decree dated
19.3.1994 suit of the appellant claiming a decree in sum of
Rs.84,646.66 has been decreed holding that defendants No.1 and 2
are jointly and severally liable to pay the decretal amount together
with pendente lite and future interest @16% per annum. Said sum
includes pre suit interest @16% per annum.
3. However, the liability qua defendant No.3 impleaded as
Page 1 of 3
respondent No.3 in the appeal has been held limited to Rs.25,000/-.
Likewise, liability of defendants No.4 and 5 impleaded as respondents
No.4 and 5 in the appeal has been held limited to Rs.24,460.20.
4. We agree with the submission made by learned counsel
for the appellant that on the sum held as the liability of defendants
No.3 to 5 pendente lite and future interest was required to be
granted. We also agree that since appellant demanded the amount
due on 29.12.1985 vide notice Ex.PW-1/33 pre suit interest w.e.f.
29.12.1985 @16% per annum was liable to be paid by said
defendants.
5. It appears that by mistake the learned Trial Judge has
omitted reference to pendente lite and future interest while decreeing
the suit against defendants No.3 to 5, who we note, were the
guarantors.
6. Limiting liability under the guarantee, certainly, pendente
lite and future interest has to be paid. Pre suit interest w.e.f.
29.12.1985 has also to be paid.
7. The contractual rate of interest is admittedly @16% per
annum. This is the pre suit interest w.e.f. 29.12.1985, pendente lite
and future interest granted by us against the defendants No.3 to 5.
8. We dispose of the appeal and modify the impugned
judgment and decree dated 19.3.1994 and modify the same by
decreeing the suit of the appellant against defendants No.3 to 5 by
holding that said defendants would be liable to pay pre suit interest
w.e.f. 29.12.1985, pendente lite and future interest @16% per annum
till payment is made on the principal sums held liable to be paid by
Page 2 of 3
said defendants.
9. No costs.
PRADEEP NANDRAJOG, J.
J.R. MIDHA, J.
DECEMBER 02, 2008
Dharmender
Page 3 of 3