After referring to various judgments of different High Courts and of this Court, the single Judge of the High Court of Karnataka came to the companyclusion that as the appellant herein did number reply to the letters accom panying the installments which was sent by the judgment debtors specifi cally mentioning that the amount be appropriated against the head of principal, it was to be presumed that there was implied acceptance of the amount towards the principal amount, on the part of the appellant decree holder.
Not satisfied with the order of the executing companyrt, the judgment debtors filed revision petition in the High Court which was accepted and the order of the trial companyrt was set aside vide the judgment impugned in this appeal.
It was found on facts that the decree holder had intimated the judgment debtor that the amount paid by them had number been appropriated towards the principal amount.
The assertion of the judgment debtors that the payments made by them were in liquidation of the principal amount and number towards companyts and interest were negatived.
