https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=197143 Interest charged on a promissory note was not shown on the facts to be excessive, so relief under the Usurious Loans Act, 1918 was refused. The assessment of excessiveness depended on the circumstances of each transaction, including the nature of the loan, risk to the creditor, security, and the debtor's position; no fixed rule applied. After notification of the debtor's estate under the Madras Estates (Abolition and Conversion into Ryotwari) Act, 1948, the creditor's accrued contractual right to interest was not defeated by retrospective implication. Contractual interest was confined to the date of notification, and thereafter only simple interest at 6 per cent per annum could be recovered. en-us Wed, 10 Jul 1957 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 28 Dec 2017 17:54:32 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=197143 Interest charged on a promissory note was not shown on the facts to be excessive, so relief under the Usurious Loans Act, 1918 was refused. The assessment of excessiveness depended on the circumstances of each transaction, including the nature of the loan, risk to the creditor, security, and the debtor's position; no fixed rule applied. After notification of the debtor's estate under the Madras Estates (Abolition and Conversion into Ryotwari) Act, 1948, the creditor's accrued contractual right to interest was not defeated by retrospective implication. Contractual interest was confined to the date of notification, and thereafter only simple interest at 6 per cent per annum could be recovered. Case-Laws Indian Laws Wed, 10 Jul 1957 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=197143