SARUPA Vs. PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK AND ANR.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS Regular Second Appeal has been filed by the defendant against whom a suit for recovery of an amount of Rs. 1,49,606/ - filed by the respondent -Bank was decreed by the learned Trial Court and he was directed to pay the said amount along with interest @ 17.5% per annum with half yearly rests from the date of filing of the suit till its actual realization and whose first appeal against the above said judgment and decree, was also dismissed by the learned first appellate Court vide its judgment and decree dated 28.5.2001.

(2.) LEARNED Counsel for the appellant has made two -fold submissions. Firstly, it is contended that the loan was advanced by the Bank for agricultural purposes, therefore, the rate of interest could not have been more than 6% per annum. His second contention is that even as per the agreement and the promissory note, Ex. P8, the rate of interest was 12.5% per annum with half yearly rests with 2% penal interest and, thus, the respondent -Bank could not have been awarded interest @ 17.5% pet -annum by the Courts below.

(3.) SO far as the second contention is concerned, one can find the answer in para 13 of the judgment passed by the learned first appellate Court. Relying upon the statement of the Bank official, Mr. F.C. Taneja, who appeared as PW2, a categoric finding of fact has been returned that as per the agreement between the parties, the rate of interest was revisable and was actually revised to 15.5% per annum with half yearly rests with 2% penal interest. This is what precisely has been granted by both the Courts.