Research › Browse › Judgment

Karnataka High Court · body

1998 DIGILAW 19 (KAR)

CANARA BANK, ARSIKERE v. B. E. SEDDAPPA

1998-01-15

T.N.VALLINAYAGAM

body1998
T. N. VALLINAYAGAM, J. ( 1 ) THERE is delay of 93 days in filing the appeal. I do not find any convincing reasons to accept the delay. I. A. I is dismissed. ( 2 ) EVEN otherwise on merits I find that the Courts below has given 6% interest under Order 34, Rule 1kb) which reads as follows:" (B) subsequent interest upto the date of realisation or actual payment on the aggregate of the principal sums specified in clause (a) as calculated in accordance with that clause at such rate as the court deems reasonable". In a case coming under Order 34, Rule 11 (b), the Court is empowered to grant subsequent interest at reasonable rate. The Court below has held that 6% is reasonable rate of interest and there is no reason for this court to come to a different conclusion. ( 3 ) THEREFORE, in any event of the matter, there is absolutely no merit in the appeal. Therefore, both the appeal as well as the application are dismissed. --- *** --- .