Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 – s.31(7)(b) – Award of interest pendente lite on the sum awarded – Award affirmed by High Court – Challenge to – Clause 18.1 of the agreement relied upon by the appellant to contend that the agreement between the parties proscribed grant of pendente-lite interest: Held: Arbitral tribunal can be denuded of its power to award pendente lite interest only if the agreement/contract between the parties is so worded that the award of pendente lite interest is either explicitly or by necessary implication barred – A clause merely barring award of interest on delayed payment by itself will not be readily inferred as a bar to award pendente-lite interest by the arbitral tribunal – Clause 18.1 when read as a whole, does not expressly or by necessary implication proscribes grant of pendente lite interest by the arbitral tribunal – It merely says that there would be no interest payable by the Corporation on any delayed payment/disputed claim – Neither it bars the arbitral tribunal from awarding pen dente lite interest nor it says that interest would not be payable in any respect whatsoever – Thus, clause 18.1 would not limit the statutory power of the arbitral tribunal to award pendente-lite interest – No error in the award of pendente lite interest warranting any interference with the award – Post-award interest is in line with s.31(7)(b) as it then existed – No merit in the appeal. [Paras 25, 26]
Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 – s.37(1) – Payment of interest by arbitral tribunal – Position of law, stated. [Para 12]
As published in the Supreme Court Reports, Supreme Court of India. Headnotes prepared by: Divya Pandey. Text from the Indian Supreme Court Judgments open data set (Dattam Labs), CC BY 4.0.
This page is for informational and research purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Consult a qualified advocate for advice specific to your situation.