That apart, he has asked for the refund of the money that he had deposited or has been deducted by the plaintiffrespondents. According to him, he had total security deposit of Rs.2.5 lakhs. But out of that security deposit, a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- according to him is lying with the plaintiff-respondents and that amount has not been refunded to the defendant-appellant. Further, a sum of Rs.64,261.5/- is due to be paid by the plaintiffrespondents in connection with the running bill. Thus the defendantappellant is also entitled to get a sum of Rs.64,261.5/- which was deducted without any reason. That apart, a sum of Rs.49,622.85/- is entitled to the defendant-appellant as the admissible transit shortage deducted from the running bills. Thus, the defendant claimed a sum of Rs.17,32,139.66/- from the plaintiff-respondents with interest @ 17.5% per annum with effect from 02.05.1995 for a period closing on 31.12.1997. The interest according to the plaintiff is to be accounted for at Rs 8,08,331.84/-. As the plaintiffrespondents withheld the said sum of Rs. 17,32,39.66/- the defendant-appellant claimed the interest over it. The total counterclaim therefore stood at Rs. 25,40,471.50/-. The further interest was also claimed from 01.01.1988 till realisation from the plaintiff. The said counter-claim was registered as Money Suit No.5/1998 (Counter-claim) and both the Money Suit and the counter-claim were tried and adjudicated together in terms of the said order of the High Court.
