JUDGMENT : RYVES, J.:— This appeal arises out of a suit brought by the plaintiff to recover damages on account of a contract entered into with the defendant to supply 150 bags of a special kind of sugar weighing 375 maunds, at Rs. 17-8 per maund. The bags were to be delivered 50 at a time, in the months of January, February and March, 1920. The contract itself was entered into on the 18th September, 1919. It is admitted that the plaintiff did not get delivery on the due dates. The defence was that the contract was a purely wagering one and that the suit was not, therefore, maintainable under section 30 of the Indian Contract Act. This defence was accepted by the trial court, but, on appeal, the learned District Judge of Cawnpore, in a very careful judgment, in which he has, in our opinion, properly set out the law on the question and has given all the facts affecting the issue, ultimately came to the conclusion that the contract, while a speculative one, was not a wager within the meaning of section 30. It seems to us that the view of the law which he has taken is in accordance with that laid down by their Lordship of the Privy Council in Bhagwan Das Parasram v. Burjorji Ruitanji Bomanji, [1917] I.L.R., 42 Bom., 373. In our opinion, therefore, his decision was right. 2. On behalf of the plaintiff a cross-objection has been filed with respect to interest from the date of the institution of the suit until its final determination by this Court. It seems to us that this was a point which was overlooked by the lower appellate court. In our opinion the plaintiff is entitled to interest. We, therefore, modify the decree of the court below by awarding the plaintiff interest at the rate of 6 per cent from the date of the suit uptil this date on the amount decreed by the lower appellate court. 3. The defendant will pay the costs of this appeal and of the cross-objection including in this Court fees on the higher, scale. We allow Mr. Iqbal Ahmad three days time within which to file certificate of fees.