PRAKASH KRISHNA,J. - (1.) THE present revision has been filed at the instance of a decree-holder, under Section 115 of CPC against the order dated 3-2-2007, whereby the executing Court has held that the judgment-debtor is entitled to recover the interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of institution of the suit till the date of passing of the decree.
(2.) FACTS of the case lie in a narrow compass and may be noticed in brief. The applicant is a company registered under the Companies Act having its registered office at 101, Neel Kanth, Commercial Centre, Shahar Road, Andheri (East) Bombay. The opposite party no. 1 is also a private company registered under the Companies Act having its registered office at Peer Panch, Chhatta Bazar, Mathura and the opposite party no. 2 is its Managing Director. On the request of opposite party no. 1 herein, the applicant advanced a sum of Rs. one crore by way of three separate loans for Rs. 25 lacs, 25 lacs and 50 lacs to meet the financial require­ment of the opposite parties for implementation of sugar project at village Gopi, District Aligarh. The said sums were repayable on or before 1 -12-1995. A sum­mary suit no. 3959 of 1996, was instituted by the present applicant before the Bombay High Court for recovery of Rs. 1,18,56,438. A money decree against the opposite parties for a sum of Rs. 1,52,74,256-71 together with simple interest at the rate of 18% per annum on the principal amount of Rs. one crore till the date of payment was passed. The said decree has attained finality, as has not been challenged by either party. The decree was transferred for execution to Aligarh Court and the said case was registered as execution case no. 1 of 2000 wherein an objection under Section 47 CPC, was filed by the judgment debtor opposite parties, on the ground that the interest at the rate of 18% has been wrongly awarded by the Bombay High Court and it should have been at the rate of 6% per annum. Further objec­tion was that the judgment debtors are liable to pay the interest from the date of institution of the suit till the passing of the decree. The objections filed by the judgment debtors have been upheld by the order under revision. Challenging the same, the present revision is at the instance of the decree holder.
(3.) THE only point mooted in the present revision is whether the executing Court could have varied or modified the period and rate of interest, while execut­ing the decree.;