2015 (7) TMI 539 - HC - Indian Laws

Claim of interest - Suit for money on account of delayed payment of the principal sum and the agreed interest. - Whether the suit is barred by waiver, acquiescence, estoppel or principles analogous thereto - Whether there has been accord and satisfaction between the parties in respect of the transactions, which form the subject matter of the suit - This Court cannot lose sight of, one fact that the plaintiff encashed the amounts received after the maturity without protesting that the interest is to be paid not till the date of maturity of those bonds but its actual payments. - if the protest is not made before the encashment of the amount and it does not appear from the conduct of the parties that the such encashment was made under protest, the plaintiff is prevented from raising an objection over the short payment

Summary

Issues Involved:
1. Whether the suit is barred by waiver, acquiescence, estoppel, or principles analogous thereto?
2. Whether there has been accord and satisfaction between the parties in respect of the transactions, which form the subject matter of the suit?
3. Whether in view of orders passed in C.A. No. 1380 of 1998 and C.A. No. 1834 of 2000 the present suit is not maintainable?
4. Whether there has been any delay or failure on the part of the defendant in registration or enfacement of the bonds?
5. Whether there was a belated payment by the defendant of the bond value and whether the plaintiff is entitled to interest on belated payment of the principal amount at the rate of interest mentioned in the bond from the date of maturity with half-yearly rest or any other rate till the date of payment as claimed in the paragraphs 33 and 35 of the plaint?
6. Whether the defendant was liable to pay interest on quantified periodical interest on each bond from due dates till the date of payment at the agreed rate of interest or at any other rate till the date of payment as claimed in the paragraphs 34 and 35 of the plaint?
7. Whether the claim of the plaintiff in the suit is on account of interest on interest, and if so, whether the plaintiff is entitled to claim the same?
8. Whether the plaintiff is entitled to the claims made in the plaint or any other relief?

Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:

Issue 1: Waiver, Acquiescence, Estoppel
The court found that the plaintiff had accepted the redemption amount without protest and only later raised the issue of interest on delayed payment. By encashing the redemption amount without any reservation, the plaintiff waived their right to claim additional interest. Thus, the suit is barred by waiver, acquiescence, and estoppel.

Issue 2: Accord and Satisfaction
The court concluded that there was accord and satisfaction between the parties. The plaintiff accepted the redemption amount and the corrected TDS without any immediate objection, indicating that the matter was settled to their satisfaction at that time.

Issue 3: Maintainability in View of Orders in C.A. No. 1380 of 1998 and C.A. No. 1834 of 2000
The court determined that the suit is maintainable despite the orders in the mentioned cases. The orders did not preclude the plaintiff from seeking remedies for delayed payment.

Issue 4: Delay or Failure in Registration or Enfacement of Bonds
The court found that the delay in registration or enfacement of the bonds was due to the embargo imposed by the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) and the pending liquidation proceedings against CRB Capital Market Ltd. The defendant acted in compliance with RBI guidelines and sought necessary clarifications, thus there was no unjustifiable delay on their part.

Issue 5: Belated Payment and Entitlement to Interest
The court ruled that the plaintiff is not entitled to interest on the belated payment of the principal amount. The delay was due to regulatory and legal constraints, not any fault or negligence on the part of the defendant.

Issue 6: Liability to Pay Interest on Quantified Periodical Interest
The court held that the defendant is not liable to pay interest on the quantified periodical interest. The plaintiff did not establish that there was an agreement or conduct indicating capitalization of interest, which is necessary to claim interest on interest.

Issue 7: Claim on Account of Interest on Interest
The court found that the plaintiff's claim for interest on interest is not maintainable. The plaintiff failed to demonstrate that the interest was capitalized and became part of the principal sum adjudged.

Issue 8: Entitlement to Claims Made in the Plaint
The court concluded that the plaintiff is not entitled to the claims made in the plaint. The acceptance of the redemption amount without protest and the lack of evidence for capitalization of interest led to the dismissal of the suit.

Conclusion:
The suit fails with costs, and all issues are answered primarily in the negative, except for issues 1 and 2, which are answered in the affirmative. There shall be no order as to costs.