IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.Q.BARKATH ALI WEDNESDAY, THE 26TH AUGUST 2009 / 4TH BHADRA 1931 AS.No. 694 of 1999(C) --------------------- AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 27/02/1999 IN IA 93/96 IN OS.95/1990 of SUB COURT, THIRUVALLA .................... APPELLANT(S): PETITIONER -------------- KERALA STATE FINANCIAL ENTERPRISES THIRUVALLA BRANCH, THIRUVALLA REP. BY ITS MANAGER BY ADV. SRI.E.K.NANDAKUMAR SRI.A.M.SHAFFIQUE, SENIOR ADVOCATE SRI.A.K.JAYASANKAR NAMBIAR RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENTS --------------- 1. S.S.SURENDRA KUMAR PARTNER, TRIVENI TRADING COMPANY THAIPARAMBIL, PALIEKARA THIRUVALLA 2. STATE OF KERALA REP. BY THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR PATHANAMTHITTA ADV. SRI.S.SUBHASH CHAND FOR R1 GOVT. PLEADER SRI.SHYSON.P.MANGUZHA THIS APPEAL SUITS HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 26/08/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.Q.BARKATH ALI, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - A.S.No.694 OF 1999 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 26th day of August , 2009 JUDGMENT Challenge in this appeal by the petitioner in a final decree application is to the final decree passed by the lower court in a suit for settlement of account. 2. The appellant is the Thiruvalla Branch of Kerala State Financial Enterprises represented by its Branch Manager. The 1st respondent filed O.S.95/1990 before the lower court against the appellant herein who is the KSFE and the State for settling the accounts of the plaintiff regarding the amount due to the KSFE. The plaintiff was a subscriber to five A class tickets in Chitty No.21/1981 as chittal Nos.31, 32, 33, 34 and 35 for Rs.20,000/- for each ticket. Chitty Nos.32 and 33 were prized and were paid to the plaintiff. Chitty No.31 was prized for Rs.14000/- but it was unpaid to the subscriber. The plaintiff defaulted the payment in respect of chitty Nos.34 and 35 and the company substituted others. The plaintiff filed A.S.No.694/1999 2 the suit for settling the accounts with the KSFE. A preliminary decree was passed on 31st March 1995 allowing the plaintiff to have the accounts between the plaintiff and the KSFE settled. It is provided in the preliminary decree that the actual amount due from the plaintiff to the KSFE will be decided in the final decree proceedings and that the plaintiff and the appellant have liberty to apply within six months for passing a final decree. 3. The second defendant in the suit, the KSFE filed the final decree application I.A.No.93/1996 for settling the accounts. A Commissioner was deputed by the lower court for settling the accounts. He filed his report. Plaintiff as well as the appellant filed objections to the report of Commissioner. On the side of the petitioner in the final decree petition in KSFE, PW1 was examined and Exts.A1 to A7 were marked. On the side of the plaintiff, he was examined as DW1. The Commissioner's report was marked as Ext.C1. On a direction of the lower court, the appellant herein and the plaintiff filed separate statements before the lower court. The lower court accepted the statement of the plaintiff and found that the balance amount due to A.S.No.694/1999 3 KSFE as on 15/01/1999 is Rs. 24,316/-. The petitioner in the final decree application , the KSFE has now come up in appeal challenging the said final decree. 4. The learned counsel for the appellant argued that the first respondent /plaintiff is not entitled to interest for the amount due to them and that therefore the statement filed by the appellant should have been accepted by the lower court. For several reasons I am not inclined to accept the above contention put forward by the appellant. As per the statement of KSFE, the total amount due to KSFE is Rs. 66720/- in Chitty No. 32 and 33. As per the statement filed by the plaintiff also, the amount due to the KSFE in those two chitties is Rs. 66,643 . In the statement filed by the KSFE, the amount due to the subscriber in chitty No. 31, 34 and 35 is shown as Rs. 9320.54 . But as per statement filed by the plaintiff the amount due to the subscriber is shown as Rs. 42,316/-. It is seen from these statements that the KSFE did not calculate interest for the amount due to the subscriber . Admittedly, the KSFE has deposited the price amount in Treasury and they are drawing interest on that amount. Under Clause 19(b) Variyola as stated by the A.S.No.694/1999 4 lower court subscriber is also entitled to interest for the amount due to him. Therefore, in my view the lower court is perfectly justified in accepting the statement filed by the plaintiff i.e. the first respondent in this appeal and holding that the amount due to KSFE as on 15/01/1992 is Rs. 24,316/-. That being so, the final decree passed by the lower court has to be confirmed and the appeal has to be dismissed. In the result, the appeal is dismissed. In the circumstances, parties shall bear their own costs. P.Q.BARKATH ALI JUDGE sv. A.S.No.694/1999 5