1 S.B.Civil Second Appeal No.243/2006 The Sub Post Master & Ors. vs Smt. Ram Kanya & Ors. Date of order : 27.11.2007. HON'BLE MR. PRAKASH TATIA, J. Mr. VK Mathur ] Mr. Rishabh Sancheti ], for the appellants. Mr. Sanjeet Purohit, for the respondents. <><><> Heard learned counsel for the parties. The appellant is aggrieved against the concurrent findings recorded by the two courts below in judgment dated 11.1.2005 passed by the trial court and the appellate judgment and decree dated 4.4.2006. Learned counsel for the appellant vehemently submitted that the plaintiff-respondent's husband had some deposits in the post office (appellant). The respondent-plaintiff's husband died on 19th July, 1996, but the respondent's husband disclosed the nominee one Surya Prakash. In view of the above reason, the appellant-post office could not have paid the amount to plaintiff, but plaintiff obtained succession certificate and, therefore,the appellant- post office paid the entire amount with interest to the plaintiff-respondent, reference of which is clearly mentioned in judgment of the trial court at 2 page no.12, still the trial court has awarded interest @ Rs.6% per annum against the appellant and the appellate court has dismissed the appeal. It appears from the judgment of the trial court dated 11.1.2005 that the trial court considered all the facts carefully and, thereafter, passed the decree that till the date of maturity, the defendant- appellant shall be liable to pay the interest as per the contract and, thereafter, the defendant shall pay interest @ Rs.6% per annum. The trial court very clearly mentioned that the interest shall be payable upto the date of receipt of the amount by the plaintiff. Therefore, the decree is very clear and it provides only interest @ 6% per annum after the date of maturity of the deposits, which were lying with the appellants-defendants and, thereafter, interest @ 6% per annum only and it has been clarified that shall be payable upto the period of recovery of the amount by the plaintiff. I do not find any substantial questions of law are involved in this appeal. Hence, the appeal of the appellant is dismissed. (PRAKASH TATIA), J. c.p.goyal/-