Kurian, J. - (1.) - The appellant is before this Court aggrieved by the judgment of the High Court. The High Court has granted the facility of 36 installments for payment of arrears of rent and fixed interest @ 6% per annum. The party respondents herein had actually given up the challenge on the revision of rent before the High Court. Therefore, the High Court restricted itself only to this point.
(2.) Mr. Parag P. Tripathi, learned senior counsel appearing for the appellant submits that the rate of interest should have been 15 to 18% in terms of the rate schedule fixed by the Board under the Major Port Trusts Act, 1963. We do not think that this aspect of the matter has been gone into by the High Court. Learned senior counsel appearing for the respondent(s) points out that this rate was fixed only in the peculiar facts of these cases and, therefore, the High Court apparently declined to go into that aspect.
(3.) Learned senior counsel appearing for the appellant submits that this judgment is being used as a precedent in other cases as well. We do not think that this judgment can be used as a precedent for the purpose of fixation of rent since there is no adjudication by the High Court on that aspect.;