Hemant Gupta, J. - (1.) CHALLENGE in the present Regular Second Appeal is to the judgment and decree passed by the Courts below, to the extent that future interest @ 6% p.a., has been awarded instead of agreed rate of 17 -1/2% p.a. with half yearly rest, claimed by the plaintiff -appellant. The plaintiff -appellant filed a suit for recovery of Rs. 1,85,687.50p on the ground that the defendant has borrowed a sum of Rs. 83,000/ - for the purchase of tractor on 1.7.1988 and since there is a default in payment, the plaintiff claimed the defaulted amount along with interest @ 17 -1/2% p.a., in terms of the documents executed by the defendants.
(2.) THE learned trial Court decreed the suit in respect of the loan amount along with agreed rate of interest up to the date of filing of suit, but in respect of the future interest, granted a decree @ 6% p.a. for the reason that the loan has been obtained for the agricultural purposes. Said decree has been affirmed in appeal by the learned first Appellate Court. The learned counsel for the appellant has contended that both the Courts fell in error of law while not granting the decree in respect of the agreed rate of interest from the date of decree.
(3.) I do not find any merit in the argument raised by the learned counsel for the plaintiff that the plaintiff is entitled to the agreed rate of interest even for the post decree period. In Central Bank of India v. Ravindra : (2002) 1 SCC 367, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has examined the question of levy of interest and held that the grant of future interest falls in the discretion of the Court. It has been held as under: - 55.... (8) Award of interest pendente lite and post -decree is discretionary with the court as it is essentially governed by Section 34 CPC dehors the contract between the parties. In a given case if the court finds that in the principal sum adjudged on the date of the suit the component of interest is disproportionate with the component of the principal sum actually advanced the court may exercise its discretion in awarding interest pendente lite and post -decree interest at a lower rate or may even decline awarding such interest. The discretion shall be exercised fairly, judiciously and for reasons and not in an arbitrary or fanciful manner." In view of the above, the discretion exercised by the Learned Trial Court and affirmed by the Learned Fist Appellate Court cannot be said to without jurisdiction. The same was exercised keeping in view the fact that the loan was advanced for agricultural purposes. I do not find any patent illegality in the findings recorded by the Courts below, which may give rise to any substantial question of law in the present Regular Second Appeal. Dismissed.;