JUDGMENT 1. - Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. In this writ petition, the petitioner is challenging the validity of order dated 2.6.2007 passed by Civil Judge (JD), Suratgarh District Sriganganagar whereby in the execution proceedings, the executing court passed an order to pay the rent as per the decree to the non-petitioner with 12% interest. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in view of Section 34 of CPC, interest at the rate of 6% can be awarded but learned executing Court exceeded its jurisdiction and passed the order to pay 12% interest upon dues, therefore, the order impugned may be modified. 4. In support of his contention, learned counsel for the petitioner has invited my attention towards the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court reported in (2012) 4 SCC 544 (Food Corporation of India v. Richhpal Swami) in which the Hon'ble Supreme Court while adjudicating the same controversy reduced the interest from 18% to 6%. 5. After hearing learned counsel for the parties, I have perused Section 34 of CPC which reads as under:- "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 whee there is no contractual rate, the rate at which moneys are lent or advanced by nationalised banks in relation to commercial transactions." 6. Further I have also perused the judgment cited by counsel for the petitioner in case of Food Corporation of India (supra) in which following adjudication is made in para 7 and 8 of the judgment, which is as follows:- "7. Further I have also perused the judgment cited by counsel for the petitioner in case of Food Corporation of India (supra) in which following adjudication is made in para 7 and 8 of the judgment, which is as follows:- "7. What cannot be disputed is that according to the said interpretation the rate of pendente lite interest and future interest was intended to be the same. Now if that be so, interest pendente lite would stand reduced to 6% once the rate for future interest was reduced to 6% by the appellate court. A conjoint reading of the appellate court's order modifying the rate of future interest and the executing court's order dated 14-1-2005 would lead only to one conclusion that the rate of interest would be 6% p.a. pendente lite just as it was for the future. The High Court was thus in error in holding that the decree had awarded pendente lite interest @ 18% p.a. At any rate the judgment and decree passed by the trial court does not support that interpretation. 8. In the result, we allow this appeal, set aside the order passed by the High Court to the extent it records the interest @ 18% p.a. For the period during which the suit remained pending before the trial court has been awarded by the said court. It follows that the executing court shall calculate the amount payable to the decree-holder by taking a sum of Rs. 6,61,132 as the principal amount decreed in favour of the plaintiff with interest @ 18 % p.a. On the same awarded upto the date of filing of the suit. Interest pendente lite and future shall, however, be calculated on the principal amount of Rs. 6,61,132 @ 6% p.a. The amount so determined shall be disbursed to the decree-holder out of the amount already deposited by the judgment-debtor. In the event of any excess being found, the same shall be refunded to the appellant just as deficit, if any, shall be made up by the appellant. No costs." 7. 6,61,132 @ 6% p.a. The amount so determined shall be disbursed to the decree-holder out of the amount already deposited by the judgment-debtor. In the event of any excess being found, the same shall be refunded to the appellant just as deficit, if any, shall be made up by the appellant. No costs." 7. In view of Section 34 of CPC and aforesaid judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court, the order impugned is hereby modified and 12% rate of interest as ordered by the executing court is hereby reduced to 6% interest p.a. and further, the petitioner - State Farms Corporation of India Ltd. is directed to release entire amount of respondent along with interest of 6% from the date of entitlement till the date of actual payment of amount within three months.The writ petition is disposed of in above terms. No costs.Petition Disposed of. *******