On July 18, 1960, his claim was decreed in a sum of Rs.
7 and interest up to the date of the suit at the rate of 9 per annum.
7 valued the claim for purposes of jurisdiction and companyrt fee at Rs.
Defendant No.
In the memorandum of appeal, defendant No.
Appeal by special leave from the judgment and order dated April 12, 1961, of the Bombay High Court in Civil Revision Application No.
The State of Maharashtra has filed this appeal by special leave against this order.
10, 120.
1,033.40 nP. and it bad been companyceded by the companynsel for the defendant appellant that the subject matter of the appeal was the decree passed by the trial Court.
441 of 1961.
5 of 1957 in the Court of the Civil Judge Senior Division at Ahmedabad to recover Rs.13,205 on account of the principal lent to defendant No.
7 appealed to the High Court against the decree.
70 on the memorandum of appeal and to amend the claim accordingly.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal No.
G. Patwardhan and A.G. Ratnaparkhi, for respondent No.
13,033 6 6 and his grounds Nos.
1 and 48 of appeal were as follows That the lower Court erred in decreeing the plaintiffs suit.
13,033 6 6 with future interest from the date of suit till realization at 40 per annum on a sum of Rs.
V. Gupte, Additional Solicitor General of India and R.H. Dhebar, for the appellant.
587 of 1962.
1 of Schedule 1 of the Bombay Court fees Act, 1959, hereinafter called the Act, for purposes of companyrt fee payable on the memorandum of appeal.
The plaintiff respondent No.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by RAGHUBAR DAYAL J. This appeal, by special leave, raises the question whether the amount of interest decreed for the period subsequent to the institution of a suit companyes within the expression amount or value of the subject matter in dispute in art.
1 instituted Special Suit No.
