Judgment :- 1. The connection between these two revisions is that the same chitty foreman is the plaintiff and the same Presiding Officer has disposed of both the suits, the common question being the disallowance of interest because the learned Munsiff in these cases took the view that interest is payable only from the date of suit and that too at 6%. 2. These suits were laid by the chitty foreman to recover the defaulted subscriptions from the prized subscribers who have executed bonds agreeing to pay interest at 12%. The learned Munsiff took the view in one case which was not even contested that they are penal provisions, but the judgment does not show in what respect it is penal and which exactly is the penal element involved, Ex facie the decision of the court below is incorrect. 12% interest cannot be characterised as unconscionable interest in chitty transactions especially when the rate is mentioned in the contract. The court below was, therefore, wrong in disallowing interest claimed in the plaint till date of suit. No doubt, from the date of suit the plaintiff will be entitled to claim interest only at the rate of 6% as correctly held by the court below. The amounts decreed in both the suits therefore require modification. 3. The suit involved in C.R.P. 1180/73 is SCS. 319/1972. There after disallowing interest, the learned Munsiff granted a decree only for Rs. 304.15. If interest also is to be awarded the amount will be Rs. 424.15. Hence the decree passed by the court below is modified, and the plaintiff is given a decree for Rs. 424.15 with interest at 6% from the date of suit till realisation. The plaintiff is also entitled to recover his costs. 4. In C.R.P. 1183/73 the decree challenged is the one passed in S.C.S. 180/1971. The learned Munsiff granted a decree to the plaintiff for Rs. 325/- exclusive of interest. Inclusive of interest the amount to be decreed will be Rs. 392.75. In modification of the lower court's decree the plaintiff is given a decree to recover Rs. 391.75 with 6% interest from the date of suit till realisation. The plaintiff is also entitled to recover costs. Both the revisions are ordered as shown above. There will be no order as to costs in this court.