Skip to content


Basanti Bibi Vs. Sheo Mangal Parshad and anr. - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectBanking
CourtAllahabad
Decided On
Judge
Reported in2Ind.Cas.199
AppellantBasanti Bibi
RespondentSheo Mangal Parshad and anr.
Excerpt:
negotiable instruments act (xxvi of 1881), section 80 - interest--collateral agreement to pay interest--promissory note silent as to interest--rate of interest 6 per cent.--evidence act (i of 1872), section 2. - - per mensem, and accordingly allowed that rate of interest, holding that though the interest was undoubtedly high, the security was not a good security and the plaintiff had in consequence refused to lend the money 'unless it was made worth his while to do so. under the circumstances the parties will pay and receive costs in all courts proportionate to failure and success......lower appellate court has given a decree for that amount and interest at the rate of rs. 48 per cent. per annum. the promissory note is silent as to interest, but the learned district judge found that there was an agreement between the parties to pay interest at the rate of 4 per cent. per mensem, and accordingly allowed that rate of interest, holding that though the interest was undoubtedly high, the security was not a good security and the plaintiff had in consequence refused to lend the money 'unless it was made worth his while to do so.' upon appeal the only point raised before us is that the rate of interest allowed by the court below is excessive and that a lower rate ought to be awarded. it appears to us that the learned district judge overlooked the provisions of section 80 of.....
Judgment:

1. This is an appeal from a decree of the learned District Judge of Benares passed in a suit brought by the plaintiffs for recovery of the amount due on foot of a promissory note, dated the 22nd of January 1904. The amount secured by the note was a principal sum of Rs. 1,100. The lower appellate Court has given a decree for that amount and interest at the rate of Rs. 48 per cent. per annum. The promissory note is silent as to interest, but the learned District Judge found that there was an agreement between the parties to pay interest at the rate of 4 per cent. per mensem, and accordingly allowed that rate of interest, holding that though the interest was undoubtedly high, the security was not a good security and the plaintiff had in consequence refused to lend the money 'unless it was made worth his while to do so.' Upon appeal the only point raised before us is that the rate of interest allowed by the Court below is excessive and that a lower rate ought to be awarded. It appears to us that the learned District Judge overlooked the provisions of Section 80 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, Act XXVI of 1881. The preceding section of that Act provides for the payment of interest where interest is specified in a promissory note or Bill of exchange. Section 80 deals with a case in which no rate of interest is specified in the instrument and it provides that with certain exceptions interest on the amount due shall be calculated at the rate of 6 per cent. per annum from the date on which the amount becomes due. The case before us does not fall within any of the exceptions referred to in that section. Consequently interest was only chargeable at the rate of 6 per cent, per annum. No agreement of the parties if not embodied, in the instrument, can override the provisions of the Act. There is no allegation of any usage as to the rate of interest such as would take this case out of the operation of the statute to which we have referred. We accordingly allow the appeal and modify the decree of the Court below by reducing the rate of interest chargeable against the defendant appellant from Rs. 48 to 6 per cent, per annum to be calculated from the date of the note; all the other grounds of appeal were abandoned. Under the circumstances the parties will pay and receive costs in all Courts proportionate to failure and success.


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