JUDGMENT Hon’ble Pankaj Mithal, J.—List revised. 2. No one appears for either of the parties. Therefore, I have perused the record myself and proceed to decide the appeal on merits. 3. The plaintiff had purchased the property in auction sale. He deposited the entire auction money but ultimately the auction was set aside. He was not even given possession of the property so purchased. The auction money deposited by him was not immediately returned and the part remained with the defendants. Therefore, he instituted a suit for the recovery of the part of the amount and for the loss by way of interest on the auction money for the period the amount remained with the defendant. The suit was decreed by the Court of first instance for the recovery of Rs. 1,34,386/- with interest of 5% w.e.f. 26.4.1993. The plaintiff was also awarded interest @ 5% on Rs. 1,15,551.65 paise from 26.4.1993 till 1.12.1993 and on Rs. 28,185/- from 26.4.1993 to 11.2.1994. In appeal however, rate of interest awarded was increased to 10% therefore, one of the defendant has preferred this second appeal. 4. The only substantial question of law which arises in this appeal is; whether the interest awarded @ 10% is excessive as it relates to the period prior to the institution of the suit. 5. Section 34, C.P.C. provides that where a decree is for payment of money the Court can order interest at a reasonable rate on the principal sum adjudged from the date of the suit to the date of decree of the suit this would be in addition to any interest on such principal sum for any period prior to the institution of the suit. Besides the above, it also provides that further interest not exceeding 6% per annum may be awarded from the date of decree till its payment. Section 34 C.P.C., for the sake of convenience, is quoted below : “34. Besides the above, it also provides that further interest not exceeding 6% per annum may be awarded from the date of decree till its payment. Section 34 C.P.C., for the sake of convenience, is quoted below : “34. Interest.—(1) Where and in so far as a decree is for the payment of money, the Court may, in the decree, order interest at such rate as the Court deems reasonable to be paid on the principal sum adjudged, from the date of the suit to the date of the decree, in addition to any interest adjudged on such principal sum for any period prior to the institution of the suit, with further interest at such rate not exceeding six per cent per annum as the Court deems reasonable on such principal sum from the date of the decree to the date of payment, or to such earlier date as the Court thinks fit. Provided that where the liability in relation to the sum so adjudged had arisen out of a commercial transaction, the rate of such further interest may exceed six per cent per annum, but shall not exceed the contractual rate of interest or where there is no contractual rate, the rate at which moneys are lent or advanced by nationalised banks in relation to commercial transactions. Explanation I.—In this sub-section ‘nationalised bank’ means a corresponding new bank as defined in the Banking Companies Acquisition and Transfer of Undertaking Act, 1970 (5 of 1970). Explanation II.—For the purposes of this section, a transaction is a commercial transaction, if it is connected with the industry, trade or business of the party incurring the liability." 6. A plain reading of the aforesaid provision reveals that interest is payable in three parts i.e. (1) on the principal amount from the date of the suit to the date of decree; (2) for the period prior to the institution of the suit; and (3) from the date of decree to the date of payment. In the earlier two stages reasonable interest can be awarded at the discretion of the Court. In the earlier two stages reasonable interest can be awarded at the discretion of the Court. However, in the third stage the exercise of discretion to pay interest cannot be more than 6% per annum provided it is not a commercial transaction wherein the Court can award even higher rate but not exceeding the contractual rate or where there is no such contractual rate not exceeding the rate of advancing loan fixed by the nationalised bank. 7. Normally, the discretion exercised by the lower Court in fixing the rate of interest awarded on the principal sum adjudged is not open to interference by the Court of second appeal. Admittedly, as per the findings of the two Courts below, the auction money of the plaintiff was unlawfully retained by the respondents and as such he was deprived of its choose and benefit and, therefore, the defendants were legally liable to make good the said loss by paying interest on the said amount. The award of 10% interest on the said amount for the period prior to the institution of the suit and for the period during which the suit remained pending appears to be reasonable and cannot be disturbed under the facts and circumstances. However, the lower appellate Court has awarded interest @ 10% per annum not only for the above period i.e. up to the date of decree but till the date of payment. This is what is prohibited by Section 34, C.P.C. Further interest from the date of decree to the date of payment cannot exceed 6% per annum in non-commercial transaction. Therefore, the award of interest @ 10% from the date of decree i.e. 11.9.2002 till its payment is certainly in contravention to Section 34 of the Act. 8. Accordingly, I am of the view that though award of interest @ 10% from 1.12.1993 till the date of the decree i.e. 11.9.2002 is not liable to be disturbed, but the award of the said rate from the date of the decree till its payment is excessive and against the statutory provision. 8. Accordingly, I am of the view that though award of interest @ 10% from 1.12.1993 till the date of the decree i.e. 11.9.2002 is not liable to be disturbed, but the award of the said rate from the date of the decree till its payment is excessive and against the statutory provision. Therefore, the appeal succeeds in part and the judgment, order and decree of the lower appellate Court dated 22.9.2003 passed by District Judge, Jalaun at Orai in Civil Appeal No. 72/2003 (Akhilesh Kumar Dwivedi v. Union of India, through Chief Secretary, U.P., Lucknow and two others) is modified to the extent that the interest awarded @ 10% per annum from the date of the decree till its payment shall stand reduced to 6% per annum. In all other aspects the decree shall remain untouched. 9. The appeal allowed accordingly, in part. No orders as to costs. ————