1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR BENCH, JAIPUR JUDGMENT S.B. Civil First Appeal No.151/1994 (M/s. Vadilal Enterprises Private Limited Versus M/s. National Advertising Company) Date of Judgment :: 9th April, 2009 PRESENT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NARENDRA KUMAR JAIN Mr. Sanjay Mehrishi for the appellant Mr. Parag Rastogi for the respondent BY THE COURT: Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. Initially the learned counsel for the appellant argued the case on all the issues, but during the course of arguments, he confined his arguments only in respect of award of interest @ 24% per annum by the trial court. His contention is that even as per Section 34 of the Civil Procedure Code, the pendente-lite and future interest should not have been awarded more than 6% per annum, therefore, to that extent the order of the trial court be set-aside. 3. The learned counsel for the respondents also agrees that the rate of interest of 24% awarded by the trial court is excessive, but he submits that award of 2 interest @ 6% will be inadequate. However, he further admits that it is a discretion of the court to award reasonable rate of interest looking to the facts and circumstances of the case. 4. I have considered the submissions of learned counsel for both the parties and examined the impugned judgment and record of the trial court. 5. The plaintiff-respondent filed a suit for recovery of a sum of Rs. 1,17,490/-, which has been decreed by the trial court with interest @ 24% per annum from 18th December, 1992 till the date of realization. The only dispute for adjudication in the present appeal is in respect of rate of interest, whether the rate of interest @ 24% per annum awarded by the trial court should be confirmed or it should be reduced. As per sub-section (1) of Section 34 CPC, the Court is empowered to award an interest on adjudged amount at such rate not exceeding 6% per annum as the court deems reasonable. 6. After considering the submissions of learned counsel for both the parties, I agree with the submission of learned counsel for the appellant that rate of interest awarded in the 3 present case is excessive and the same is liable to be reduced. In my view, the reasonable rate of interest will be @ 6% per annum. 7. The learned counsel for the appellant informs that in pursuance of stay order dated 16th January, 2006 passed by this Court as well as the order dated 12th April, 2006, the appellant has already deposited a sum of Rs. 1,17,490/- on 5.5.2006 in the executing court. If it is so, then the interest will be awarded @ 6% per annum for the period from 18th December, 1992 to 5th May, 2006. 8. Consequently, the appeal is partly allowed. The impugned judgment and decree dated 4th May, 1994 passed by the Additional District Judge No. 6, Jaipur City in Civil Suit No. 1/1993 is modified to the extent of rate of interest and it is directed that plaintiff will be entitled to interest on the decretal amount @ 6% per annum in place of 24%, as awarded by the trial court, from 18th December, 1992 to 5th May, 2006. The plaintiff-respondent will be at liberty to withdraw the amount deposited by the appellant. 9. The learned counsel for the appellant prays for two months' time to deposit the 4 amount of interest in the trial/executing court. The time prayed for is allowed but it is made clear that in case the same is not deposited within aforesaid time, then it will be open for the plaintiff to execute the decree in respect of amount of interest. 10. The cost is made easy. (NARENDRA KUMAR JAIN),J. DK