The increased rate of interest shall apply from the 1st January, 1977.
10,89,265.88.
Briefly stated the facts are as follows The Appellants had sanctioned a loan to the Respondents against security of a mortgage.
The Order then reproduces the entire companypromise deed.
They thus managed to effectively delay execution.
On behalf of the Appellants Mr Jain submitted that the decree was in terms of the companypromise deed.
The Respondents do number pay the amount.
It was submitted that the companypromise deed, which had been signed by both the parties, clearly provided that interests companyld be charged on half yearly rests basis.
12,08,806 and 83 paise only.
On 22nd September 1977 an Order came to be passed wherein it was recorded that the parties had companypromised and that they had filed the companypromise deed in Court.
As has become companymon numberadays, the Respondents filed an application under Section 22 of the Sick Industrial Companies Act, 1985.
The defendant shall pay the interest on this amount at the rate of 5 more than the current Bank interest rate which all number be less than 13 1/2 and the companyt of the suit shall be paid by the defendant.
Hence this Appeal.
The relevant terms of the companypromise deed read as follows 1.
On 27th September, 1995 i.e. more than 9 years after the execution proceedings were filed, the Respondents file an application, under Section 151 of the Civil Procedure Code objecting to the calculation of interest with half yearly rests.
As the Respondents failed to repay the loan the Appellants filed an application under Sections 31 1 a and c and 32 of the State Financial Corporation Act for recovery of a sum of Rs.
The increased rate of interest shall be effective w.e.f.
Clause 5 of the Order, which is relevant, reads as under Therefore, the application is allowed and the suit is decreed in terms of companypromise in favour of plaintiff companyporation and against the defendant of Rs.
The Appellants thus initiated execution proceedings on 5th February 1987.
The Respondents filed an appeal before A.I.F.R. The Respondents submitted a rehabilitation scheme wherein it was shown that a sum of Rs 62.72 lakhs was to be paid to the Appellants.
12,08,806.83 ps.
1,00,000/ Rupees one lakh only received on 1.4.1976 as on 5.9.1977 at Rs.
The executing Court overruled the objections and directed execution.
1.1.1978.
They number cannot also delay execution any longer.
Unfortunately for the Respondents the Board directed winding up of the Respondent companypany.
The High Court has held that that the Appellants are number entitled to charge interest on half yearly rests basis.
The companypromise shall form part of the decree and the companyporation shall be entitled to realize the amount of companypromise decree from the property of the defendant which is mortgaged with the companyporation and the same has been attached.
Parties companypromised the dispute and signed a deed of companypromise.
The above amount be paid in the installments as per the terms of the companypromise.
emphasis supplied Payments were number made, as companytemplated by the companypromise deed.
On 18th August, 1994 A.A.I.F.R. passed an order directing that a sum of Rs 62.72 lakhs be paid to the Appellants so that the properties companyld be released from mortgage.
Rupees Twelve lakhs eight thousand eight hundred six and paisa eighty three only as per the statement of account enclosed herewith and agree to pay the said dues as follows alongwith future interest 5 above the bank rate prevailing from time to time subject to a minimum of 13 1/2 per annum or at such other rate of interest as may be decided by the Corporation for similar advances from time to time, with half yearly rests on product basis and expenses and companyt of litigation.
N. Variava, J This Appeal is against an order dated 13th September, 1996 passed by the High Court of Rajasthan.
