Rajasthan State Road Transport Corpn vs Indag Rubber Ltd on 5 September, 2006
29. The onus of proving this issue was also held upon the plaintiff
who has claimed an interest @ 12.10% per annum on the outstanding
amount pendentlite and future. However, Hon'ble Supreme court in a
number of judgments reported as Pt. Munshi Ram @ Associates (P) Lt.
Vs. DDA, 2010 SCC Online Delhi 2444, Rajendra Construction Co.
Vs. Maharashtra Housing & Area Development Authority and
others, 2005 (6) SCC 678, McDermott International Inc. Vs. Burn
Standard Co. Ltd. and others, 2006 (11) SCC 181, Rajasthan State
Road Transport Corporation Vs. Indag Rubber Ltd., (2006) 7 SCC
700, Krishna Bhagya Jala Nigam Ltd. Vs. G. Harischandra, 2007 (2)
SCC 720 & State of Rajasthan Vs. Ferro Concrete Construction Pvt.
Ltd. (2009) 3 Arb. LR 140 (SC) has repeatedly mandated that courts
must reduce the high rates of interest on account of the consistent fall in
the rates of interest in changed economic scenario. Under the facts and
circumstances of the case, keeping in view the nature of transactions of
the case and the aforesaid settled law, court is of the considered opinion
that interest of justice would be met, if an interest @ 6% per annum is
granted to the plaintiff on the adjudicated and determined amount
pendentlite and future from the date of filing of the suit till the date of its
realisation. This issue is decided accordingly.