JUDGMENT : BANERJI, J. 1. This appeal arises out of a suit for the redemption of a mortgage, made on the 2nd of September, 1893. The mortgage was for a term of ten years. It provides that interest should be paid at the rate of 12 annas per cent per mensum, that is 9 per cent per annum., and that the interest should be paid annually. It further provides that in case of default in the payment of interest at the end of each year, interest should be charged at the increased rate of 15 per cent per annum, from the date of the mortgage to the date of payment. There is a further provision in the mortgage deed, that in case of default in the payment of interest annually, the interest is to be added to the principal, and further interest is to be charged thereon. The last clause in the mortgage deed is to the effect that the mortgagor, if he chooses to do so, may redeem the mortgage before the expiry of the term of the mortgage, but that, if he does so, he would be liable to pay interest for the full term of the mortgage. The plaintiff offered to pay to the mortgagee the principal and so much of the interest as was due up to the date of the suit. 2. The suit, it may be observed, was brought on the 15th of October, 1901, that is, nearly 2 years before the expiry of the term of the mortgage. The defendant, mortgagee, contended that he was entitled to interest for the full term of the mortgage, and that such interest should be charged at the higher rate. 3. He also claimed compound interest. The courts below have allowed to him simple interest at the original rate of 9 per cent, per annum, up to the date of the decree. The mortgagee has preferred this appeal and repeats in this Court the plea as to interest and compound interest put forward by him in the Courts below. In my judgment, having regard to the provisions in the mortgage deed, the mortgagee is entitled to interest for the unexpired term of the mortgage. 4. The mortgagee has preferred this appeal and repeats in this Court the plea as to interest and compound interest put forward by him in the Courts below. In my judgment, having regard to the provisions in the mortgage deed, the mortgagee is entitled to interest for the unexpired term of the mortgage. 4. As I have already said, the deed distinctly provides that the mortgagor would be competent to redeem the mortgage before the expiry of the full term of ten years, provided that he paid interest for the unexpired term of the mortgage. The provision cannot, in my opinion be regarded as a clog on the right of redemption. It only empowers the mortgagee to obtain from the mortgagor that amount which the mortgagor would have been bound to pay, had he redeemed the mortgage on the expiry of the term for repayment. It was competent to the parties to enter into a contract by which the mortgagor was enabled to redeem before the expiry of the term upon compensating the mortgagee for the loss which be might in the event of the mortgage being redeemed before the expiry of the term. The mortgagee might not be in a position to re-invest this money on equally favorable terms, and therefore he might justly require the mortgagor to provide in the mortgage for reimbursing him for any possible loss. Such a condition as that contained in the mortgage deed has never been regarded as a fetter on the mortgagor's right of redemption, and the learned Vakil for the respondent has not been able to refer to any authority in which it has been held to do so. The appellant is therefore entitled to interest for the full term of the mortgage, namely, ten years. As for compound interest, he is certainly not entitled to charge it for the period subsequent to the date of the suit. As for the period anterior to the date he is, under the fourth clause of the mortgage, entitled to claim compound interest. That clause provides for the payment of compound interest upon the failure of the mortgagor to pay interest annually. There has admittedly been such a failure in the case. A provision in the bond for the payment of compound interest cannot be deemed to be a penalty, and such interest the creditor is entitled to recover. 5. That clause provides for the payment of compound interest upon the failure of the mortgagor to pay interest annually. There has admittedly been such a failure in the case. A provision in the bond for the payment of compound interest cannot be deemed to be a penalty, and such interest the creditor is entitled to recover. 5. The stipulation as to payment of a higher rate of interest from the date of the bond in the event of default, is certainly a penal clause and cannot be enforced. The appellant, mortgage, is therefore entitled to compound interest up to the date of his suit at the original rate of 9 per cent, per annum, and further simple interest, at the same rate, for the period from the, date of the suit to the stipulated date of payment. He is also entitled to simple interest at the stipulated rate of 9 per cent, per annum upon the principal amount of the debt from the date of the decree to the date of pay ment. Upon these conditions a decree should be passed in favour of the plaintiff for the redemption of the mortgage. The amount due to the appellant should be calculated and specified in the decree of this Court. The result is that I allow the appeal, and, varying the decree of the Court below, make a decree in favour of the plaintiff for redemption of the mortgage upon condition that he do pay to the defendant-appellant the amount which may be found due in accordance with this judgment, together with proportionate costs of the suit on or before the 1st of July next, the parties paying and receiving such costs in all Courts in proportion to their failure and success. As already stated, the appellant will get further interest up to the date of payment upon the principal amount of the mortgage at the rate of 9 per cent, per annum.