M/S. H. BHURMAL AND BROTHERS, RAVIVAR PETH, BELGAUM AND ANOTHER Vs. BASAVANT DHARMAPPA PUJARI ALMS KUDACHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Defendants in O.S. No. 23 of 1998 on the file of the Additional Senior Civil Judge at Belgaum are the appellants. The respondent had instituted the suit on 23-9-1998 to pass a decree for recovery of Rs. 72,000.00 with interest and costs. Written statement was filed and suit was contested. Eight issues were raised for trial. Plaintiff got examined himself as P.W.1 and marked 8 documents as Exs. P.1 to P. 8. Defendant 2 got himself examined as D.W. 1 and marked 4 documents as Exs. D.1 to D. 4. The suit was decreed on 17-3-2003 for a sum of Rs. 15,297.00 by way of damages for the period from 23-9-1995 till 1-1-1997 i.e., being the loss caused to the plaintiff by the defendants for having used the suit schedule premises unauthorisedly. Then said sum was directed to be paid with interest at 18% p.a. from 1-1-1997 till realisation along with the cost of the suit, quantified at Rs. 5,844.00. R.A. No. 26 of 2003 filed in the District Court at Belgaum by the defendants having been dismissed on 29-10-2005 by the II Additional District Judge, Belgaum, this second appeal was filed. The grievance of the appellants is limited to that part of the impugned judgments and decrees by which the Courts below have held that the plaintiff is entitled to interest at 18% p.a. on the sum of Rs. 15,297.00.

(2.) The substantial question of law for consideration is, whether interest can be awarded on the sum claimed as damages for a period prior to the date of demand of institution of the suit

(3.) Smt. Hemalekha K.S., learned Advocate, argued that no interest should have been awarded for the period prior to the date of filing of the suit and even otherwise, the rate of interest awarded is highly excessive. She submitted that Interest Act, 1978 (for short, 'the Act') is not applicable as no sum was payable as debt and there was not demand for payment of interest prior to the service of notice vide Ex. P. 6. She further submitted that what was demanded was damages and not interest. Reliance was placed upon the decision in Mahabir Prasad Rungta Vs. Durga Datta, AIR 1961 SC 990.