CHAKRA DHAR DEOLI Vs. S S SATIJA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is directed against the Order dated 7.5.1991 passed by the District Forum, Gulbarga in Complaint No.2/1991 on its file.

(2.) It arises in this way : -The appellant was the complainant and the respondent was also the respondent before the District Forum and they will be hereinafter referred to by Their position before the District Forum. The respondent had advanced a loan of Rs.20,000/- to the complainant on 27.6.1969 re payable in 300 monthly installments together with interest at the rate of 7-% p. a. The complainant defaulted in the payment of the installments. The dispute was referred to the arbitrator under the Co-operative Societies Act. An award was passed on 2.9.1974 directing the complainant to pay Rs.24,982.56 together with interest at 10-% p. a. from 25.3.1974 till the date of payment. After the award was passed, the complainant paid certain amounts from 30.6.1979 onwards. The complainant preferred an appeal against that a ward and that appeal was dismissed. Then the property of the complainant was brought to sale. The sale proclamation was challenged by the complainant in Writ Petition No.14021/1987. That Writ Petition was also dismissed on 19.9.1988, According to the complainant, the amounts paid by him should have been appropriated by the respondent first towards the payment of the award amount and he ought not to have calculated interest on the said amount from the date of payment as stated in Order 21 Rule (1) (5) of the CPC. The complainant took up that contention before the Asst. Registrar, who was executing the a ward passed against him and the Asst. Registrar did not uphold his contention. He had other remedies against that order and he did not chose to avail of the same. Then he filed a complaint before the District Forum, for directing the respondent to appropriate the amounts paid by him towards payment of the award amount.

(3.) The complaint was resisted by the respondent by contending that he was justified in appropriating the amounts paid by the complainant towards interest first and then towards the principal and that the complainant ought to have raised this point before the High Court in the Writ Petition and as he has not done so, this complaint is not maintainable.