Skip to content


Sudhakar Rao and ors. Vs. Radha Krishna Das - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectTenancy
CourtAllahabad High Court
Decided On
Case NumberFirst Appeal No. 22 of 1943
Judge
Reported inAIR1953All544
ActsDebt Law; Uttar Pradesh Encumbered Estates Act, 1934 - Sections 14(7)
AppellantSudhakar Rao and ors.
RespondentRadha Krishna Das
Appellant AdvocateJanaki Prasad and ;S.N. Gupta, Advs.
Respondent AdvocateK.N. Agarwala, Adv.
DispositionAppeal dismissed
Excerpt:
tenancy - encumbered estate proceeding - section 14(7) of u.p. encumbered estates act, 1951 - special judge can decree pendente lite and future interest on the total amount of principal and interest found due to the creditor. - - section 14 (7) clearly authorises the special judge to pass a decree for the amount found due by him with pendente lite and future interest. interest is clearly awardable on the total amount which is found due to a creditor from the landlord-applicants up to the date of the application made by the landlord-applicants......1. this is an appeal by the landlord-applicants arising out pf encumbered estates proceedings. the learned special judge passed a decree for rs. 39,8407- with pendente lite and future interest at 3 per cent, per annum in favour of the respondent-creditor. this amount of rs. 39,840/- consisted of rs. 30,000/-as principal and the rest as interest. the only contention raised before us in this appeal is that the learned special judge was not justified in decreeing pendente lite and future interest on the total amount of rs. 39,840/- but that he should have allowed interest on the principal amount of rs. 30,000/- only. this contention has no force. section 14 (7) clearly authorises the special judge to pass a decree for the amount found due by him with pendente lite and future interest. the.....
Judgment:

Agarwala, J.

1. This is an appeal by the landlord-applicants arising out pf Encumbered Estates proceedings. The learned Special Judge passed a decree for Rs. 39,8407- with pendente lite and future interest at 3 per cent, per annum in favour of the respondent-creditor. This amount of Rs. 39,840/- consisted of Rs. 30,000/-as principal and the rest as interest. The only contention raised before us in this appeal is that the learned Special Judge was not justified in decreeing pendente lite and future interest on the total amount of Rs. 39,840/- but that he should have allowed interest on the principal amount of Rs. 30,000/- only. This contention has no force. Section 14 (7) clearly authorises the Special Judge to pass a decree for the amount found due by him with pendente lite and future interest. The amount that the learned Special Judge is required to find is the amount due, i.e. principal and interest, up to the date of the application, vide Clause 2 of Section 14, U. P. Encumbered Estates Act. Interest is clearly awardable on the total amount which is found due to a creditor from the landlord-applicants up to the date of the application made by the landlord-applicants. This amount obviously includes both principal and interest.

2. There is no force in this appeal and it is dismissed with costs.


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