PARASHRAM BALAJI Vs. ASARAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) 1. This is an application for leave to appeal to His Majesty in Council. The decision in this Court did not affirm that of the trial Court and the only question for consideration is whether the amount or value of the subject-matter of the suit in the Court of first instance and in dispute on appeal to His Majesty in Council is Rs. 10,000 or upwards. It is contended on behalf of the non-applicants that this condition laid down in Section 110, Civil P. C., is not satisfied.

(2.) THE suit was based on a mortgage and the principal secured was Rs. 15,000. The claim in the trial Court was for Rs. 12,372-2-3 and there was also the usual claim for future interest on the decretal amount at 8 annas per cent per mensem from the date of suit until the date of realization. The actual amount decreed including interest up to the date of the suit was Rs. 8,974-11-0. To this was added further interest from the date of suit up to the 'dies datus' 28th April 1930, that is to say, six months after the date of the decree, amounting to Rs. 1,157-10-0. The costs of the suit Rs. 839-4-0 made the grand total Rs. 10,971-9-0.

(3.) ON behalf of the non-applicants reliance is placed on Moti Chand v. Ganga Prasad Singh (1902) 24 All 174, Nand Kishore Singh v. Ram Gulam Sahu (1912) 39 Cal 1037 and Ram Kumar v. Muhammad Yakub . The observations of Lord Davey in Moti Chand v. Ganga Prasad Singh (1902) 24 All 174 are not applicable to the present case since they have reference only to the amount of the value of the subject-matter of the suit in the Court of first instance and such value in the case before us is admittedly over Rs. 10,000. Further the case, then under consideration, as in Ram Kumar v. Muhammad Yakub , was purely a money suit in which no mortgage was involved and in our opinion suits based on a mortgage stand on a different footing in respect of interest pendente lite and up to the date fixed for payment which is a definite date.