6. During the course of trial, on behalf of the plaintiff, PWs.1 and 2 were examined and marked Exs.A.1 to A.5. None were examined on behalf of the defendant and no documents were marked. 7. Upon hearing the learned counsel for both the parties and considering the oral and documentary evidence on record, the trial Court decreed the suit with costs for Rs.8,67,000/- together with interest @ 6% per annum on principal sum of Rs.2,00,000/- from the date of suit till the date of realization. 8. The defendant, disputing the rate of interest, filed the present appeal raising several contentions and one of the contentions is that the rate of interest agreed under Ex.A.1 is only 3% per annum and not 3% per month, but, the trial Court on erroneous appreciation of law, awarded interest at 3% per month and therefore, prayed to set aside the finding with regard to the rate of interest. 9. During the course of arguments, learned counsel for the appellant/defendant would submit that in condition No.4 of para 4 at page 4 of the Mortgage Deed, dated 18.04.2002, the defendant agreed to pay interest @ 3% per annum only and not 3% per month on the principal amount of Rs.2,00,000/-. But, the trial Court granted interest at 3% per month instead of 3% per annum and whatever evidence adduced regarding rate of interest is not admissible in evidence in view of Section 92 of the Indian Evidence Act and prayed to set aside the finding recorded with regard to grant of interest.
