FAUJA SINGH Vs. PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK

JUDGEMENT

(1.) A suit for recovery of money filed by plaintiff-bank was decreed with costs and interest. The amount seems to have not been paid. The decree holder sought execution of the decree. Fauja Singh, judgment-debtor filed objections, alleging inter alia, that the expenses and the interest have been wrongly calculated and the future interest awarded by the trial Court is illegal. The objections were considered and ultimately dismissed by the executing court by order dated 11. 5. 1991. The executing Court after relying upon the judgment in Central Bank of India v. Ajit Singh, (1990-1)97 P. L. R. 626 that after the amendment in Code of Civil Procedure, the plaintiff was entitled to agreed rate of interest, rejected the prayer of the judgment-debtor Fauja Singh. It is this order which has been impugned in this revision petition.

(2.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioner submitted that in cases other than relating to commercial loans, future interest cannot be granted by the trial court at more than 6% per annum. Learned counsel submitted that the land of the petitioner is under mortgage with the respondent-bank and thus the court decreeing the suit and the executing court have ignored the provisions of Order 34 Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure that the executing Court in such cases can. certainly modify the decree regarding rate of future interest. Learned counsel for the respondent-bank on the other hand placed reliance on a judgment of the Supreme Court in N. M. Veerappa v. Canara Bank and Ors. , (1998-1) 118 P. L. R. 503 and submitted that the executing court cannot go behind the decree and is bound to execute the same as it is.