CWP No. 3882 of 2008 (1) IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH (i) CWP No. 3882 of 2008 Magh Singh ....Petitioner Versus 4 ....Respondents (ii) CWP No. 3883 of 2008 Hari Singh ....Petitioner Versus State of Punjab and others ....Respondents (iii) CWP No. 3982 of 2008 Amarjeet Kaur ....Petitioner Versus State of Punjab and others ....Respondents (iv) CWP No. 3986 of 2008 Ajaib Singh ....Petitioner Versus State of Punjab and others ....Respondents Coram: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT GUPTA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA Present: Shri Arun Jindal, Advocate, for the petitioners. Shri A.S. Jattana, Additional AG, Punjab, for respondent Nos. 1 to 4. Shri J.S. Bhandohal, Advocate, for respondent No.6. 1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? HEMANT GUPTA, J. This order shall dispose of Civil Writ Petition Nos. 3882; 3883; 3982 and 3986 of 2008, as all the writ petitions raise common questions of law and facts. However, for the facility of reference, facts CWP No. 3882 of 2008 (2) are taken from CWP No. 3882 of 2008. The petitioner has filed the present writ petition so as to claim interest @ 10% per annum on the amount of Kisan Vikas Patras. Earlier the petitioner filed a writ petition claiming the return of the Kisan Vikas Patras, which were in possession of the respondents. The said writ petition was allowed on 13.12.2006 and the respondents were directed to return Kisan Vikas Patras, purchased by the petitioner within a period of two months. Admittedly, the Kisan Vikas Patras have been returned within the time specified. However, the petitioner claims that since there is delay of approximately four years in return of the said Kisan Vikas Patras i.e. from the date of maturity till the date of actual delivery, therefore, the respondents are liable to pay interest on the aforesaid amount. The fact remains that the directions of this Court issued on 13.12.2006 to return the Kisan Vikas Patras have been complied with. There was no direction to pay interest on the amount of the Kisan Vikas Patras. Such directions were given long after such Kisan Vikas Patras were due for payment. Since there is no relief of payment of interest in the earlier writ petition filed by the petitioner, the present writ petition solely claiming the interest, is not maintainable and is in fact barred keeping in view the provisions of Order 2 Rule 2 CPC. In view of the above, there is no merit in these writ petitions. Consequently, the writ petitions are dismissed. (HEMANT GUPTA) JUDGE (KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA) JUDGE 5.9.2008 ds