Appeal against an execution order refusing 7% interest on delayed interim maintenance was dismissed. The High Court held that without a specific order from the trial court granting interest, the execution court could not exceed the decree terms and rightly refused the prayer.
Appeal dismissed at the stage of admission; no interest granted.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
(1)
Court No. - 34
Case :- FIRST APPEAL No. - 555 of 2019 Appellant :- Neelam Widge Respondent :- Dinesh Widge Counsel for Appellant :- In Person
Hon'ble Sudhir Agarwal,J. Hon'ble Rajeev Misra,J.
"2-2-2018& dsl iqdkjk x;k izkfFkZuh us izkFkZuk i= 28@12 izLrqr fd;kA oknh gkftj ugha vk;kA vkns'k gqvk fd okfnuh gkftj vk;hA oknh ugha vk;k vkns'k gqvk fd r/w tkjh gks cdk;k /kujkf'k eqdnek fn0 28-2-18 dks &&&& gsrq is'k gksA fu;r frfFk rd vnk;xh u gksus ij cdk;k jkf'k ij 7 izfr'kr O;kt ns; gksA^^
(2)
court has not committed any error in refusing interest to appellant on the amount of interim maintenance paid with delay.
Order Date :- 9.9.2019 Manish Tripathi
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the execution court can grant interest at 7% despite no order from the trial court directing the same for delayed payment.
Whether the appeal lacking merit in the execution proceedings for interest is liable to be dismissed at the stage of admission under Order XLI Rule 11 C.P.C.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Neelam Widge
Dinesh Widge
Sudhir Agarwal
Rajeev Misra
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
