(1.) this appeal by the plaintiff is against disallowing of interest at the rate of 8% per annum with quarterly interest on certain amount. The total claim on this account comes to Rs. 5,76,627/- on which court fee of Rs. 37,972/- would be payable.
(2.) the contention of Sri G.S. venkatachalapathy, learned counsel for the appellant is that since no court fee is payable in respect of interest pendente lite the appeal has to be valued only in accordance with the Provisions of Section 47(ii) of the Karnataka Court Fees and Suits Valuation Act. That would be Rs. 200/- only, which has been paid on this appeal. We do not agree with this contention in view of the clear Provisions of explanation (3) to Section 49 of the Act, which reads thus:
(3.) in this connection the counsel sought to rely upon an order made in canara bank, nanjangud v M/s. Hidayath fertilizers, nanjangud, in which under similar circumstances lesser court fee paid was held to be sufficient. However, the order is non-speaking and no reasons are given therein. Obviously the specific provision referred to above was not brought to the notice of the court. However, we find support for our conclusion in imamsab peeroop and another v shreeshailappa and another .