GEETU LAKHPAT Vs. JAIPAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The challenge by means of this Regular First Appeal under Section 96 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC) is to the impugned judgment and decree dated 6.10.2010 whereby the suit of the Respondent/Plaintiff was decreed for Rs. 2,00,000/- alongwith interest @ 2% per month from 18.2.2002 till realization.

(2.) Learned Counsel for the Appellants has in the appeal only prayed for reduction of the unduly high rate of interest of 2% per month which has been granted by the trial Court. Reliance has firstly been placed upon Section 3 of the Usurious Loans Act, 1918 (as applicable to Delhi) as per which in case of an unsecured loan the maximum rate of interest which is allowed is 12-1/2% per annum simple. Learned Counsel for the Appellants also relies upon various judgments of the Supreme Court as per which the Supreme Court has directed the Courts to take note of the consistent fall in the rates of interest on account of the changed economic scenario, more so when there is time spent in litigation. These judgments of the Supreme Court are Rajendra Construction Co. v. Maharashtra Housing & Area Development Authority and others, 2005 6 SCC 678, McDermott International Inc. v. Burn Standard Co. Ltd. and others, 2006 11 SCC 181, Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation v. Indag Rubber Ltd., 2006 7 SCC 700 & Krishna Bhagya Jala Nigam Ltd. v.G. Harischandra, 2007 2 SCC 720 and State of Rajasthan v. Ferro Concrete Construction Pvt. Ltd, 2009 3 ArbLR 140.

(3.) Learned Counsel for the Respondent, in reply, states that the Respondent is entitled to interest @ 2% per month because the said rate was a contractual rate of interest.