Gurbachan Singh vs Kuldeep Singh

G.S. Sandhawalia, J.—The present appeal has been filed by the defendant against the judgments and decrees of the Court below whereby suit for recovery of Rs. 3,85,500/- (Rs. 3,00,000/- as principal and Rs. 85,500/- as interest) filed by the plaintiff has been decreed with costs and simple interest at the rate of 12% per annum from the date of filing of the suit i.e. 27.9.2007 till the date of decree and with future interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of decree i.e. 9.12.2008 till realisation of the decretal amount vide judgment and decree dated 9.12.2008. The said judgment and decree has been upheld by the Lower Appellate Court vide judgment and decree dated 20.2.2009.

This Court while issuing notice of motion on 2.3.2010 had passed the following order:-

The appeal is directed against the judgments passed by the learned trial Court dated 9.12.2008 and that of the first Appellate Court dated 20.2.2009 by which the suit for recovery filed by the plaintiff-respondent has been decreed.

A perusal of the impugned judgments shows that the execution of the pronote was duly proved and consequently, concurrent findings of fact have been recorded against the defendant-appellant who had merely set up denial as a defence but was unable to prove anything from where it could be inferred that the pronote was not validly executed. In this view of the matter, there is no merit in the appeal as it does not involve any substantial question of law.

At this stage, learned counsel for the appellant contends that the interest component is highly exaggerated and that he is willing to settle the matter if the same is reduced.

Notice of motion only to the aforesaid extent for 28.6.2010.

Thereafter, counsel for the appellant had taken time on 4.4.2011 to find out whether the appellant is ready to pay the principal amount along with 6% interest throughout on the next date of hearing before the Executing Court to claim concession in the rate of interest. On 21.4.2011, counsel for the respondent had agreed that in case the appellant pays the entire principal amount along with interest @ 6% per annum, the plaintiff-respondent will waive of the remaining amount of interest. Accordingly, it was directed that "let the appellant appear in the Court on next date of hearing along with sum of Rs. 1 lac, to be paid to the respondent in the Court." On 2.5.2011, the Court was informed that the interim order had not been complied with and accordingly, thereafter case had been adjourned as many as on four dates but undertaking of paying the sum of Rs. 1 lac has not been complied with.

In view of above, there is no option but to dismiss the present appeal in view of the preemptory order passed on 2.3.2010 and due to unwillingness of the appellant to settle the dispute as undertaken by him as noticed above. Accordingly, the present appeal is dismissed.