IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARUN-UL-RASHID TUESDAY, THE 15TH JUNE 2010 / 25TH JYAISTHA 1932 AS.No. 425 of 1996() -------------------- OS.974/1992 of III ADDL. SUB COURT, ERNAKULAM .................... APPELLANTS/PLAINTIFFS: ---------------------------- 1. K.A.KUNJUMOIDEEN, MANAGING DIRECTOR, INTEGRATED RUBIAN EXPORTS LTD, AROOR- 688 534. 2. C.A.SALIM, DIRECTOR, INTEGRATED RUBIAN EXPORTS LTD, AROOR-688 534. 3. INTEGRATED RUBIAN EXPORTS LTD, AROOR-688 534 REPRESENTED BY IT MANAGING DIRECTOR K.A.KUNJUMOIDEEN. BY ADV. MR.M.M.ABDUL AZIZ, SENIOR ADVOCATE RESPONDENT/PLAINTIFF: --------------------------- HANSA TRAVELS PRIVATE LIMITED, PALLIMUKKU JUNCTION, S.A.ROAD, COCHIN-682 016 REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR MAJOR M.G.C.NAIR. ADV. MR.S.SREEKUMAR THIS APPEAL SUITS HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 15/06/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: AS.No. 425 of 1996 ORDER ON C.M.P.NOS.206/1997 & 2693/1996 DISMISSED. 15.6.2010 SD/- HARUN-UL-RASHID, JUDGE. // TRUE COPY // P.A TO JUDGE. HARUN-UL-RASHID, J. ------------------------ A.S.No.425 Of 1996 ---------------------- Dated this the 15th day of June, 2010. J U D G M E N T Defendants in O.S.No.974 of 1992 on the file of the III Additional Sub Court, Ernakulam are the appellants. The suit was filed for recovery of money. Trial court decreed the suit allowing the plaintiff to recover a sum of Rs.73,637/- and interest at the rate of 18% per annum of Rs.58,442/- from the date of the suit till reaslisation from the defendants jointly and severally with costs. Parties are hereinafter referred to as the plaintiff and defendants as arrayed in the suit. 2. The suit was filed on the allegation that the plaintiff as a travel agent for Indian and International travel issued two International Air Travel Tickets of Pan American Airways, New York, to defendants 1 & 2 for travel from Cochin to New York and back to Cochin for a total cost of Rs.65,408/- on 30.1.1991 as the agent of the Air Lines M/s.Panam New York and that the defendants paid only Rs.25,000/- on 6.1.1992 to the plaintiff towards the cost of the tickets and balance amount of the tickets A.S.No.425 Of 1996 ::2:: and another Rs.18,034/- as the balance amount of the cost of the ticket brought for them by the plaintiff earlier are due. 3. Defendants filed a written statement disputing the liability and prayed for dismissal of the suit. 4. Plaintiff adduced evidence in support of its contentions. PW1 was examined. Exts.A1 to A10 were marked. Defendants did not adduce any evidence either oral or documentary. 5. The total cost of the tickets is Rs.65,408/-. According to the plaintiff a sum of Rs.18,034/- was also due from the defendants towards cost of other tickets brought for them by the plaintiff earlier. The plaintiff sent lawyer notice to the defendants demanding the dues and interest, the defendants replied admitting the purchase of two tickets and also their liability of Rs.65,408/- but, denied the earlier dues of Rs.18,034/-. In the reply the defendant also offered payment of Rs.40,408/-. 6. PW1 who is the assistant manager of the plaintiff company proved plaint averments. Ext.A2 is the invoice for purchasing two tickets to America in Pan Airways. Plaintiff A.S.No.425 Of 1996 ::3:: tendered evidence to prove that they used to purchase Air Tickers on credit basis and that they have to pay the money within 15 fifteen days. According to PW1 they maintained accounts of the defendants. Ext.A3 is the true copy of the account book. Ext.A4 is the application submitted for visa. Ext.A5 is the ledger kept in the office of the plaintiff. The accounts of the defendants is shown in page Nos.233, 234 and 355. Exts.A5(a), (b) & (c) are the relevant entries and Ext.A5(d) is the true copy. It is the case of the plaintiff that they are not liable for the loss of the tickets but they used to assist to get the refund. They have written to the Panam Air Lines at Bombay, by that time, their head office at Bombay was closed. Then they wrote to their head office at New Jercy. Ext.A6 is the copy of that letter. But there was no reply. The lost tickets were handed over by the defendants. But, by that time the Panam Air Lines was taken over by the Delta Airlines. The tickets were sent to Delta at Bombay. Ext.A7 is the copy of that letter. Ext.A9 is the copy of the notice sent to the defendants demanding Rs.73,637/- and Ext.A10 is the reply. From the documentary A.S.No.425 Of 1996 ::4:: evidence produced by the plaintiff would show that the defendants made use of the plaintiff's service for arranging Air Tickets. Plaintiff also proved that the balance amount of Rs.58,442/- is due to the plaintiff and the accounts maintained by the plaintiff show that a sum of Rs.18,034/- is also due from the defendants. 7. The contentions of the defendants was also appreciated by the trial court in detail. The material evidence also show that the plaintiff has taken all possible ways to get back the refund but, failed. The material evidence adduced by the plaintiff show that the plaintiff is entitled to recover the sum as claimed in the plaint. The appellants/defendants have not made out any valid ground to interfere with the decree and judgment passed by the trial court. I also fully agree with the findings recorded by the trial court. 8. Learned counsel for the appellants submitted that the grant of interest at the rate of 18% per annum for Rs.58,442/- from the date of suit till realisation is excessive and unjust and requested this Court to fix a just amount towards interest. I find A.S.No.425 Of 1996 ::5:: the request of the appellants is just and reasonable. Therefore, the interest portion requires modification. In the result, the appeal is partly allowed. Rate of interest is fixed at the rate of 9% per annum. To that extent the decree and judgment passed by the trial court is modified. There will be no order as to costs. HARUN-UL-RASHID, Judge. bkn/-