Ramendra Mohan Datta, J. - (1.) The scope of this appeal is limited to a short point, namely, whether the written demand dated the 18th March, 1961, in this case can be construed as a notice under the Interest Act, 1839 so as to enable the plaintiff appellant to claim interest in the suit.
(2.) We looked into the demand letter and found that it could not be construed so. By this demand letter the arrears of interest had been claimed and "it was not mentioned therein that the date of the claim for interest was the date of the demand letter. Nor is there any indication therein that the liability of the debtor to pay interest under the said statute was sought to be fixed. It may not be strictly necessary to mention the statute in the notice but the provisions contained therein have got to be complied with.
(3.) If a claim under the Interest Act would be made for the payment of interest then the conditions as provided in the section and as construed by the Supreme Court would have to toe complied with. The section provides as follows:-- "1. It is therefore hereby enacted that, upon all debts or sums certain payable at a certain time or otherwise, the court before which such debts or sums may be recovered may, if it shall think fit, allow interest to the creditor at a rate not exceeding the current rate of interest from the time when such debts or sums certain were payable, if such debts or sums be payable by virtue of some written instrument at a certain time; or if payable otherwise, then from the time when demand of payment shall have been made in writing, so as such demand shall give notice to the debtor that interest will be claimed from the :date of such demand until the term of payment; provided that interest shall be payable in all cases in which it is now payable by law.";