- (1.)These two regular second appeals, viz. RSA No. 2877 of 2014 (State of Punjab and others Vs. Kirpal Singh) and RSA No. 2878 of 2014 (State of Punjab and others Vs. Lakhbir Singh), at the hands of the defendants, are directed against the judgments of reversal, whereby learned first appellate court set aside the judgment and decree of the learned trial court, accepting the first appeal of the plaintiff-respondent decreeing his suit, holding him entitled for interest @ 8% per annum on delayed payment of retiral benefits.
(2.)However, for the facility of reference, facts are being culled out from RSA No. 2877 of 2014.
(3.)Brief facts of the case, as noticed by the learned first appellate court in para 2 and 3 of the impugned judgment, are that plaintiff retired as Inspector, Food and Supplies, Gurdaspur on 31.12.2006. At the time of retirement, he was entitled to get Rs. 3,26,535/- as gratuity alongwith Rs. 63,690/- as revised amount of gratuity and Rs. 2,43,100/- towards leave encashment, but the defendants, because of the unwanted and unnecessary objections, released the amount of gratuity on 23.12.2010, revised gratuity on 27.01.2011 with a delay of more than 4 years and 10 months and the amount of leave encashment after a delay of more than 5 years although they were under statutory obligation to make payment of retiral benefits on the due date of retirement. Since defendants did not issue the pensionary benefits in time, plaintiff was entitled to claim interest on the delayed payment @ 12% per annum. He requested the defendants many times to pay amount of interest as demanded by him, but to no use. Hence the suit was filed.