R.S.A. No. 2088 of 2008 (O&M) -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH R.S.A. No. 2088 of 2008 (O&M) Date of decision: 25.02.2009 Sohan Lal ....Appellant Versus Government of Haryana and others ....Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD K. SHARMA Present: Mr. O.P. Gupta, Advocate, for the appellant. Mr. Madan Gupta, Sr. D.A.G., Haryana. ***** VINOD K. SHARMA, J (ORAL) This regular second appeal is directed against the judgments and decree dated 25.1.2007 and 4.2.2008 passed by the learned Courts below decreeing the suit filed by the plaintiff/appellant claiming arrears of salary from the deemed date of promotion. Though the learned trial Court held that the plaintiff was entitled to arrears along with interest @ 4%, but in the relief clause no relief was granted qua interest. Consequently, in the decree also, no interest has been awarded to the plaintiff. The defendant/State preferred an appeal against the judgment and decree passed by the learned trial Court, which was partly accepted, and the arrear payable was restricted for a period of three years and two months. R.S.A. No. 2088 of 2008 (O&M) -2- However, the judgment and decree passed by the learned trial Court was upheld on merit. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant raised the following substantial question of law: - “Whether decree passed by the learned Courts below is perverse being contrary to the positive finding recorded by the learned Courts below holding that the plaintiff/appellant was entitled to interest on the amount due?” The learned counsel for the appellant contends that under the Interest Act read with Section 34 of the Code of Civil Procedure, the appellant was entitled to interest @ 6% on the amount found due from the date of decree till payment. However, no interest has been granted. In support of this contention, the learned counsel for the appellant has placed reliance on the judgment of this Court in Sukhdiyal Singh Vs. Secretary, Department of Education Govt. of Haryana and others, 2003(4) Recent Services Judgments 280 wherein this Court was pleased to grant simple interest @ 8% per annum on the amount due. The learned Senior Deputy Advocate General, Haryana, however, supports the order and contends that it was the discretion of the Court to grant or not to grant interest and, thus, the non-grant of interest cannot be the subject matter of appeal, as discretion exercised could not be said to be arbitrary, as the claim was highly belated. However, on consideration of matter, I find force in the contention raised by the learned counsel for the appellant. The learned lower appellate Court though rightly restricted payment of arrears to three years and two months, but once it was found as a fact that R.S.A. No. 2088 of 2008 (O&M) -3- monetary benefits due to the appellant have not been paid, the Court was to grant interest on the amount by invoking provisions of the Interest Act read with Section 34 CPC. Though the plaintiff/appellant claimed interest @ 8%, but the maximum interest which can be granted by the civil Court under Section 34 CPC is only 6% per annum. Consequently, the substantial question of law is answered in favour of the plaintiff/appellant and this appeal is partly accepted. The judgments and decree passed by the learned Courts below are modified and it is held that the plaintiff would be entitled to interest @ 6% from the date of decree till realisation on the decreed amount. (Vinod K. Sharma) Judge February 25, 2009 R.S.