Regular Second Appeal No.4251 of 2010 -1- In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh Regular Second Appeal No.4251 of 2010(O&M) Date of Decision: November 16, 2010 Vice Chancellor, Choudhary Charan Singh Agriculture University, Hisar and others ---Appellants versus Smt. Birmati and another ---Respondents Coram: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE GURDEV SINGH *** Present: Mr.Aman Pal, Advocate, for the appellants *** GURDEV SINGH, J. In this second appeal by the appellants-defendants, the challenge is only to the extent of rate of interest, the period for which the same was to be paid and including of the interest in the principal amount for the calculation of interest. The suit was filed by the respondents-plaintiffs for declaration to the effect that they were entitled to the sum of ` 1,66,259/-, which was the amount due to their predecessor-in-interest, Labh Singh, on account of Contributory Provident Fund from the defendants. The suit was dismissed by the Trial Court but was decreed by the First Appellate Court. However, Regular Second Appeal No.4251 of 2010 -2- keeping in view the fact that the said amount had already been received by means of cheque by the plaintiffs in the month of June 2003 and that the non-payment of that amount from March 2003 to June 2003, was on account of default on their part, the suit was decreed only for the interest on the said amount at the rate of 9% per annum from May, 2001 to February 2003. Admittedly, Labh Singh had retired on 30.4.2000 and as such the amount on account of Contributory Provident Fund became payable to him after his retirement. The finding to that effect, so recorded by the First Appellate Court, could not be challenged. At the time of arguments learned counsel for the defendants did not challenge the rate of interest. He has challenged that this interest could not have been allowed for the period which has been mentioned in the judgment of the First Appellate Court. There is no force in this submission of the counsel for the defendants. Admittedly, the amount was paid by means of cheque to the plaintiffs in the month of June, 2003. It is also a fact that first cheque was prepared in the name of Labh Singh and was issued in March 2003 and thereafter, the cheque was prepared in the name of the plaintiffs and delivered to them in June, 2003. The delay from March 2003 to June 2003 was on their part. As per the statute, referred to by the counsel for the defendants and by the terms of which the defendants are bound, the interest was to be paid from the date of retirement of Labh Singh-deceased. A correct finding was recorded by the First Appellate Court that the interest is payable to the plaintiffs from May, 2000 to February, 2003. The next contention of the counsel for the defendants is that interest has been included in the sum of ` 1,66,259/- on which, as per the Regular Second Appeal No.4251 of 2010 -3- decree of the First Appellate Court, the interest is to be calculated at the rate of 9% per annum, which is not permissible. The calculations are mentioned in para No. 3 of the judgment of the First Appellate Court. Only a sum of ` 1646/- has been included in the said amount as interest. The same is to be excluded from the principal amount for the purpose of calculation of interest. Thus, the interest is to be calculated on the sum of ` 1,66,259/- minus ` 1646/- i.e. `1,64,613/-. Keeping in view the small difference and that the plaintiffs will be unnecessarily burdened with further expenses in case notice of motion is issued for modification of the decree passed in their favour, the decree is being modified without issuing such a notice. This appeal is accepted to limited extent that the interest for the period mentioned in the judgment of the First Appellate Court shall be calculated at the rate mentioned therein on the amount of ` 1,64,613/-. (GURDEV SINGH) JUDGE November 16, 2010 PARAMJIT