Short Note : The plaintiff's case, briefly stated, is that the transaction between the parties was merely of loan; that the loan was paid off and the sale-deed not being real, no title was conveyed thereunder to the defendants. The defence was that the transaction was really one of sale and not of loan; there was no question of any loan being paid off and the suit was, therefore, liable to be dismissed. 2. The first appellate Court has held the suit to be within time; affirmed the trial Court's finding that the transaction was merely of lean and not of sale; also affirmed the finding that the loan had not teen repaid; and accordingly decreed the plaintiff's suit subject to the plaintiff paying the sum of Rs. 500/- as principal and Rs. 1,702.58 Paise as interest from 10-08-1962 to 10-9-1971 (the date of first appellate Court's judgment) at the contractual rate of 24 percent per annum. Held : The plaintiff has preferred this appeal challenging mainly the award of interest at the rate of 24 percent per annum on the principal amount. The defendants have filed a cross-objection in which it is asserted that the real transaction was really that of sale and not of loan. The cross-objection has been filed beyond time and there is an application for condonation of delay in filing the same. Having heard learned counsel on the question of condonation of this delay, I am of the opinion that the delay of a few days deserves to be condoned for the reasons given in the application which is duly supported by an affidavit of Janakram, respondent No.1. The reason given is that the respondent No.1, who is an illiterate person, was not aware of the factual position in respect of filing the cross-objection till his counsel at Bilaspur told him about the same. Two of the respondents are minors in this case. In my opinion, the ground relied on constitutes a sufficient cause for condonation of the delay in filing the cross-objection. That delay is accordingly condoned. 3. It would be more appropriate to consider the point involved in the cross-objection at the beginning. The question whether the tram action was really one of loan or sale is ultimately one of fact depending on the intention of the parties. That delay is accordingly condoned. 3. It would be more appropriate to consider the point involved in the cross-objection at the beginning. The question whether the tram action was really one of loan or sale is ultimately one of fact depending on the intention of the parties. The inference drawn from the facts and circumstances found proved in the present case is also one of fact, since the application of any principle of law in reaching that conclusion is not involved therein. The concurrent finding of the two Courts below based on appreciation of the evidence present is that the transaction was really one of loan and not of sale. No reason justifying interference with such a conclusion in this appeal has been shown to me at the hearing. There is thus no ground to allow the cross-objection. It is accordingly rejected on merits. 4. In the appeal, the question for consideration is only of the rate at which interest should be awarded on the principal sum of Rs. 500/- found to have been advanced as a loan on 10-8-1962. The reasonable compensation to be paid while granting the aforesaid relief to the plaintiff would be the payment by the plaintiff to the defendants of the amount of loan together with interest thereon at a reasonable late. For this purpose, the award of interest according to section 34 of the Code of Civil Procedure taking into account the fact that the contractual rate of interest was 24 percent per annum, would be the proper course to adopt. In this background, the contractual rate of 24 percent per annum being a little too high, it would be appropriate to confine the amount of interest up to the date of suit to the principal amount only, i.e. the sum of Rs. 500/-, and to award interest on the principal amount from the date of suit until realization at the rate of 12 percent per annum. The result is that the plaintiff must pay to the defendants the sum of Rs. 500/- as the principal amount, plus Rs. 500/- as interest up to the date of suit, i.e. from 10-8-1962 to 1-8-1968, and interest on the principal amount of Rs. 500/- from 1-8-1968 until realization of the amount at the rate of 12% per annum. The result is that the plaintiff must pay to the defendants the sum of Rs. 500/- as the principal amount, plus Rs. 500/- as interest up to the date of suit, i.e. from 10-8-1962 to 1-8-1968, and interest on the principal amount of Rs. 500/- from 1-8-1968 until realization of the amount at the rate of 12% per annum. This being a commercial transaction, the award of subsequent interest at the rate of 12% per annum is justified in the circumstances of the present case. Decree modified.