JAGAT NARAYAN, J.—This is a revision application by a plaintiff in a suit for recovery of money which was decreed by the trial court but was dismissed by the lower appellate court. 2. The suit was brought against Mag Raj defendant No. 1 and his son Mohanlal defendant No. 2 on the basis of Khata Ex. 1 dated 28.11.53 executed by Mohanlal alone. This Khata runs as follow: — ^^[kkrks 1 kk dqUnueyth /kujktth Hkaaojykyth eksguykyth jkadk csVk iksrk QkSteyth jk ek, uhackt okyk lwa la- 2010 dk ehxlj cn 8 rk- 28.11.53 kfuokjA 401½ fglkc djus ys.kk jS;k :ih;k pkj lkS us ,sad dynkj th.kk jks C;kt iM+r AA½ lSdM+k jk fglkc lwa nkA eksguykyth jk nkA pqdk.kk jrupUn jk gS] lk eksguykyth jkadk jk ds.kk lwa ckdh dkMks;k NS uhekt esaA fVdV ½ fVdV ½ nk eksguyky jkadk :- 401½ ns.kk 13. The plaintiff is therefore entitled to a decree for b. 401/- principal plus rupee 1/-interest upto the date of the suit with pendente lite and future interest at 6 per cent per annum simple. 14. It was admitted by the plaintiff that the original advanced in Smt. 1939 was Rs. 112-13-3. It is contended on behalf of the respondent that future interest should be worked out on this amount alone under sec. 34 C.P.C. The khata dated 28.11.53 amounted to a fresh contract. The plaintiff is accordingly entitled to pendente lite and future interest on the sum of Rs. 401/- for which this Khata was executed. 15. I accordingly allow the revision application, set aside the decree of the lower appellate court and decree the suit for Rs. 402/- with pendente lite and future interest at 6% per annum simple. The plaintiff shall be entitled to recover costs of the trial court as well as the lower appellate court from the respondent. I make no order as to costs of this Court which will accordingly be borne by the parties.