' SYED SAKHI HUSSAIN BOKHARI, J.---This appeal is directed against the judgment dated 26-10-1996 passed by learned Civil Judge, Lahore whereby suit for recovery of Rs. 36,49,827 with interest brought by respondent against the appellants was decreed in his favour.
2. Relevant facts for the disposal of this appeal are that plaintiff/respondent brought a suit for recovery of Rs.36,49,827 and stated that defendants/appellants awarded a contract to the plaintiff for Flood Fighting vide letter dated 14-8-1995 and plaintiff had completed the work. The defendants prepared full and final bill after deduction of tax but failed to pay the amount despite repeated demands, therefore, he was constrained to file suit. The plaintiff also prayed for awarding interest at the rate of 2% above bank rate till the realization of decretal amount. The defendants/appellants admitted that full and final bill was prepared and stated that they would pay the bill after receipt of funds. After hearing the parties leanred trial Court decreed the suit brought by respondent/ plaintiff along with interest vide impugned judgment. Hence, this appeal.
3. We have heard the arguments and perused the record.
4. As mentioned above respondent/ plaintiff had filed suit for recovery of Rs.36,49,827 on the basis of contract obtained from the appellants and the same was decreed. Learned counsel for the respondent submits that appellants have paid decretal amount to respondent, therefore, appeal has become infructuous. However, learned counsel for the appellants submits that appellants have not paid interest awarded by trial Court. He has argued that judgment of learned trial Court to the extent of interest is illegal and void and he has prayed for setting aside the impugned judgment to that extent. On the other hand learned counsel for the respondent has argued that the appellants had failed to pay the bill, therefore, respondent/plaintiff was entitled to get interest. We have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties. The perusal of record shows that appellants had not contested the case and had frankly conceded that disputed amount could not be paid due to non-availability of funds and that they were ready to pay as soon as funds were available for the said purpose. Also that as per terms of contract the amount was to be paid after receipt of funds. The case was decided without framing of issues and without recording evidence. So there was no justification to award interest to the respondent/plaintiff. Even otherwise according to learned counsel for the respondent/plaintiff, the appellants have already paid disputed amount, which too shows their bona fide. In these circumstances we find that plaintiff was not entitled to get interest. As such impugned judgment to that extent is liable to be set aside. As stated earlier there is no controversy between the parties regarding actual amount of contract, therefore, to that extent appeal has become infructuous.
5. Resultantly appeal brought by appellants is partly allowed and impugned judgment to the extent of interest is accordingly set aside. However, the amount claimed by the respondent/plaintiff has already been paid to him, therefore, to that extent appeal has become infructuous. Disposed of accordingly. No order as to costs. ' accordingly.