HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU APPEAL SUIT No.59 of 2006 JUDGMENT: This appeal is directed against the judgment and decree d 07.02.2002, in O.S.No.53 of 2000, on the file of the Senior Civil J Narsapur, West Godavari District, whereunder and whe preliminary decree was passed. 2. The appellants herein are defendant Nos.1 and 2 and respondent herein is the plaintiff in the suit. 3. The averments of the plaint in brief are as follows: Defendant No.1 is the father of defendant No.2. Defendant is the absolute owner of Ac.1.00 wet land in R.S.No.31 situat Chandaparru Village. The defendants borrowed a sum of Rs.1,00, from him towards discharge of sundry debts and to mee agricultural needs by mortgaging the plaint schedule property by of unregistered mortgage deed dated 29.09.1997. It is further ple that defendant No.1 delivered the title deed dated 15.09.1997, pat pass book and title deed, that the terms of the mortgage deed stip that the defendants should pay a sum of Rs.50,000/- on 28.09 with interest accrued on the entire amount and that the balanc Rs.50,000/-, with interest thereon at 24% p.a., on 28.09.199 default, the rate of interest payable was 30% p.a. with compoun interest. 4. Defendant No.2 filed the written statement denying averments in the plaint and pleaded that the plaintiff was entitled for interest at 12½% p.a. from the date of suit and 6% p.a. from date of decree on the principal sum of Rs.1.00 lakh. 5. On the basis of the aforesaid pleadings, the following is were framed: 1. Whether the rate of interest is penal? 2. Whether the defendants are entitled to Act 4/38? 3. To what relief? 6. On behalf of plaintiff, PWs.1 and 2 were examined and Ex to A.3 were marked. On behalf of the defendants, DW.1 was exam but no documents were marked. 7. The Trial Court, after considering the rival contentions and oral and documentary evidence, passed a preliminary decree costs for a sum of Rs.1,99,888/- with subsequent interest at 24% on Rs.1.00 lakh from the date of suit till the date of expi redemption period and, thereafter, 12½% p.a. on Rs.1.00 lakh ti date of realization. The Trial Court granted three months tim redemption. Aggrieved thereby, this appeal is filed by the defenda 8. Learned Counsel for the appellants-defendants contended th the defendants are agriculturists, awarding interest at 1 subsequent to the date of decree is excessive and, therefore, the entitled for scaling down of the interest according to the provisio A.P. (Andhra Area) Agriculturists Relief Act, (4 of 1938) (for ‘A.R.Act’). 9. Learned Counsel for the respondent-plaintiff contended th the mortgage deed stipulates payment of interest at 24% p.a., the Court rightly awarded the interest and, therefore, there are no gro to interfere with the impugned judgment. 10. It is not in dispute that the defendant borrowed a sum of Rs lakh and executed Ex.A.1, mortgage deed dated 29.09.1997. property mortgaged under the said document was land to an exte Ac.1.00 in R.S.No.31 situated at Chandaparru Village. Admittedl document was filed by the defendants to show that the pro mortgaged in favour of the plaintiff was a joint family property. In of the fact that the defendants are only seeking for scaling dow interest, the burden is on the defendants to show that the intere liable to be scaled down as they are agriculturists. However, DW his evidence, admitted that they own a joint shop premises in B Market at Palakol, that their shop was situated within the mun limits of Palakol, that some portion of it was leased out to gold s and that they were having a tiled house within the limits of Pa Hence, it cannot be said that the defendants are agriculturists an entitled for scaling down of interest according to the provisions o A.R.Act. 11. Under Order XXXIV Rule 11 CPC, the Court shall order pay of reasonable interest. The trial Court rightly decreed the However, to the limited extent of awarding interest by the trial Co 12½% is set aside. The defendants are liable to pay interest at 6% from the date of decree till the date of realization. 12. With the above observation, the appeal is dismissed. No cos K.C.BHA Date:02.02.2011 usd