https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=109345 The Court held that the bank was not entitled to pendente lite interest after the decretal amount had already been fully satisfied by drafts and fixed deposit receipts, which the bank had acknowledged and adjusted. Applying discretion under Section 34 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, it noted that the account had become a non-performing asset before the relevant cut-off date and that the Reserve Bank of India compromise settlement guidelines for chronic non-performing assets covered the case. As the minimum recoverable amount under the scheme had been met, no further sum remained recoverable and the appeal lacked merit. en-us Fri, 30 Jan 2004 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 09 Apr 2012 10:58:27 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=109345 The Court held that the bank was not entitled to pendente lite interest after the decretal amount had already been fully satisfied by drafts and fixed deposit receipts, which the bank had acknowledged and adjusted. Applying discretion under Section 34 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, it noted that the account had become a non-performing asset before the relevant cut-off date and that the Reserve Bank of India compromise settlement guidelines for chronic non-performing assets covered the case. As the minimum recoverable amount under the scheme had been met, no further sum remained recoverable and the appeal lacked merit. Case-Laws Companies Law Fri, 30 Jan 2004 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=109345