Amemar Abdul Razak v. Sri a Srinivas Rao
Case brief
What is this about?
Karnataka HC Division Bench RFA No. 2073/2023 (NC: 2026:KHC:16666-DB), decided 24-03-2026: money-recovery decree upheld with interest slashed to 6% p.a. under S.34 CPC where no written interest agreement and no commercial transaction shown; 10% pendente lite / 8% future interest replaced by uniform 6%. Remand plea by defendant (alleged denial of opportunity to place defence) rejected — no documents/materials filed by him and trial court had examined all evidence. Facts: RTGS of Rs.87,36,000 for BDA-approved site allotment never made; Exhibits P1 (legal notice), P3 (RTGS receipt), P5 (bank statement); certificate under S.65 Indian Evidence Act, 1872. Useful for S.96 CPC appeals, S.34 CPC interest caps on non-commercial transactions, and treatment of un-rebutted defences/remand requests.
What did the court decide?
Appeal partly allowed: interest under the decree reduced to 6% per annum (pendente lite and future); respondent/plaintiff held entitled to Rs.87,36,000 with 6% pendente lite and future interest per annum; Registry to draw a modified decree; amount deposited before the High Court inclusive of interest up-to-date to be released to the respondent/plaintiff towards satisfaction of the decree, with liberty to take steps in accordance with law; no order as to costs.