C. MADHU Vs. B.V.S. MURTHY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner is assailing the legality and validity of the judgment and decree passed in SC No. 3672/1998 on the file of the XI Addl. Small Causes Judge, Bangalore insofar as the prayer for rejection of the interest is concerned.

(2.) THE petitioner -plaintiff filed a suit for recovery of a sum of Rs. 17,500/ - with future interest thereon at 18% per annum from the date of suit till realisation with costs. The Trial Court after hearing and considering the material on record and conducting the trial has allowed the suit filed by the petitioner holding that the petitioner is entitled to recover a sum of Rs. 10,000/ - from the defendant with costs along with notice charges of Rs. 100/ - without considering the rate of interest as claimed by the plaintiff -petitioner in that suit.

(3.) THE principal submission of the learned Counsel for the petitioner is that the Trial Court has committed an error and proceeded to pass the order contrary to the relevant provisions the Act, in rejecting the interest claimed by the plaintiff -petitioner on the ground that the plaintiff -petitioner is not entitled to the interest as she is not doing money lending business by obtaining the licence so as to claim interest upon the hand loan given to the defendant -respondent nor the plaintiff has shown any provision of law to show that she is entitled to interest as claimed by her and even the Trial Court has gone to the extent of reducing the claim of the plaintiff in respect of notice charges from Rs. 500/ - to Rs. 100/ - without assigning any cogent reasons. Further the learned Counsel submitted that when the Trial Court has accepted that the defendant has borrowed hand loan from the plaintiff, it is duty cast on the Court to award reasonable interest. Therefore, he prayed that the impugned order is not sustainable.