Login : Advocate | Client
Home Post Your Case My Account Law College Law Library

Report No. 63

4.7. Suit merely for interest.-

Secondly, there appears to have been some controversy on the question whether a suit for the mere recovery of interest can be filed. The Calcutta High Court answered this question in the negative,1 on the ground that the Act merely gives a discretion to the court, and there is no "right" in the creditor. The Lahore High Court, however, took a different view;2 on the point. According to the Lahore view, there is nothing in law which debars a creditor from suing for the recovery of interest alone, if he has complied with the formalities required by the Interest Act, and if his case is otherwise governed by the said Act. The Nagpur decisions3-4 on the subject are conflicting. The matter, therefore, requires examination. We shall examine the case law in detail, in due course.5 We may first examine the language of the section.

1. Marshall v. Bengal Spinning etc. Co., (1897) 1 Cal WN 219.

2. Bhandari Brothers v. Municipal Committee, AIR 1931 Lah 457 (462), dissenting from Marshall v. Bengal Spinning etc. Co., (1897) 1 Cal WN 219.

3. Municipal Committee v. S.S.G.P. Factory, AIR 1938 Nag 119 (122) (Niyogi J.) (not considered in the 1944 case below).

4. Western India Life Insurance Company v. Sittabni, AIR 1944 Nag 122 (123), (Bobde J.).

5. Para. 4.9, infra.

Interest Act, 1839 Back

Client Area | Advocate Area | Blogs | About Us | User Agreement | Privacy Policy | Advertise | Media Coverage | Contact Us | Site Map
powered and driven by neosys