1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD FIRST APPEAL NO. 1334 OF 2005 Pathardi Municipal Council, Pathardi, Tq. Pathardi, District Ahmednagar. .. .. APPELANT Versus Murlidhar S/o Tatyaba Dahiphale, Age : 48 Years, Occu. : Business, R/o Phule Colony, Pathardi, Tq. Pathardi, Dist. Ahmednagar. .. .. RESPONDENT Shri K. D. Bade Patil, Advocate for the Appellant. Shri M. M. Nerlikar, Advocate for the Respondent. CORAM : B. R. GAVAI, AND N. D. DESHPANDE, JJ. DATE : 15TH SEPTEMBER, 2009. ORAL ORDER [Per B. R. Gavai, J. ] : 1. The appellant has restricted the claim in the appeal only to the question of the quantum of rate of interest. The appellant states that, in so far as merits of the decree are concerned, the appellant would not contest the correctness thereof. It is the contention of the appellant that, interest granted at the rate of Rs. 10% per annum is higher and is not permissible in accordance with law. It is submitted 2 that, the interest at the most may have been granted at the rate of Rs. 6% per annum. 2. Shri Nerlikar, learned counsel appearing for the respondent also has not seriously disputed this position. The learned counsel appearing for the respondent on instruction states that, the respondent does not seriously object to reduction of rate of interest at 6% per annum. In that view of the matter, the appeal is partly allowed. In the operative part of the judgment it shall be read the defendant shall pay to plaintiff Rs. 11,99,854/- together with future interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of suit until realization thereof. Decree be drawn in accordance with the modifications. [ N. D. DESHPANDE, J.] [ B. R. GAVAI, J.] bsb/Sept. 09