COMMANDANT 14 ASSAM RIFLES Vs. K B AGARWAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) I have heard Mr. K. Meruno, learned counsel for the appellant/defendant as well as Mr. B. N. Sannah, learned counsel for the respondent/plaintiff.

(2.) This appeal is directed against the judgment and decree passed by the learned Additional Deputy Commissioner (Judicial) Dimapur in Monday suit No. 11/82. By the aforesaid judgment, the learned court below has decreed the plaintiff suit for recovery of Rs 12,248 /- with a simple interest at the rate of 18% per annum from the date of filing the suit till the recovery of the said amount.

(3.) This case otherwise illustrates a disquieting feature as to how the trial was protected to a period of about 14 years for getting final decree of Rs 12,000/- and odd. In the present case, the Money Suit was filed on 15.4.82 and the same was decreed only on 13.2.97 after a lapse of about 14 years or so. Justice delayed is justice denied is being repeated in this case. Be that as it may, Mr. K. Meruno makes a submission that the appellant does not want to contest with regard to the decretal amount of Rs 12,248/- but the appellant is aggrieved only with regard to the interest of 18% to be paid from the date of filing of the Suit till the decretal amount is recovered, in this connection, Mr. K. Meruno submits that the delay was not caused by the defendant alone and there was also a contributory negligence on the part of the plaintiff in pursuing the suit diligently. On the other hand, Mr. B. N. Sarmah contended that the delay caused in disposing of the suit was solely attributable to the defendant. According to him, the delay was caused because the defendant applied a dilatory tactics.