Skip to content


Wahid UddIn Vs. Ramji Lal and ors. - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
Subject Civil
CourtAllahabad
Decided On
Reported inAIR1944All254
AppellantWahid Uddin
RespondentRamji Lal and ors.
Excerpt:
- ismail, j. 1. this is an appeal from an order of the special judge of meerut against a decree passed under section 14, encumbered estates act. a preliminary objection has been taken to this appeal by learned counsel for the respondent to the effect that no appeal is competent to this court under section 45 of the act. we have decided to dispose of this matter as an application under section 46. we have heard learned counsel for the appellant at some length. the sole point for consideration is whether the learned special judge was right in calculating interest on the amount found due under section 14 (4) of the act which included principal and interest. it is urged that pendente lite and future interest should be calculated only on the principal amount due from the landlord and not on the.....
Judgment:

Ismail, J.

1. This is an appeal from an order of the Special Judge of Meerut against a decree passed under Section 14, Encumbered Estates Act. A preliminary objection has been taken to this appeal by learned counsel for the respondent to the effect that no appeal is competent to this Court under Section 45 of the Act. We have decided to dispose of this matter as an application under Section 46. We have heard learned counsel for the appellant at some length. The sole point for consideration is whether the learned Special Judge was right in calculating interest on the amount found due under Section 14 (4) of the Act which included principal and interest. It is urged that pendente lite and future interest should be calculated only on the principal amount due from the landlord and not on the aggregate amount of principal and interest. Section 14 of the Act is self-contained and lays down the procedure to be followed by the Special Judge in the examination of claims and determination of the amount due from the landlord. From a perusal of Sub-sections (4), (5) and (6) it appears that the Court has to calculate interest upon the principal upto the date of the application and pass a decree with respect to the aggregate amount found due. The restrictions are to be found in Sub-clause (4) of the section which has no application to the facts of this case. In our judgment the Court below was right in calculating pendente lite and future interest on the aggregate amount found due from the landlord on the date of the application. There is, thus, no force in this appeal. It is accordingly dismissed with costs.


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //