SC: ‘Abandonment of Service is Not Voluntary Retirement’, Denying SBI Clerk Pension Benefits  ||  Supreme Court: Stranger Affected by an Interim Order is Entitled to be Impleaded in Writ Proceedings  ||  Supreme Court: Courts Cannot Replace an Authority’s Discretion, and Sets Aside Direction to Governor  ||  SC: Title Suit Hit by Constructive Res Judicata if Omitted in Prior Injunction Suit Disputing Title  ||  SC Clarifies Whether a Co-Operative Society Can Act as a Resolution Applicant under the IBC  ||  Chhattisgarh High Court: Innocent Litigants Should Not be Penalized For Lapses by Their Lawyers  ||  Delhi High Court: Marriage With the Victim Cannot Absolve an Accused of Rape under POCSO  ||  J&K&L HC: Acquisition Lapses if 80% Compensation is Unpaid Before Possession under Section 17A  ||  Delhi HC: Policy Number is Not Mandatory For LIC Details under RTI, But Basic Details are Required  ||  SC: Courts Must Curb Unlicensed Money Lenders; Probes Need Not Wait For New Law    

Union of India (UOI) v. Ambica Construction - (Supreme Court) (16 Mar 2016)

Contract must explicitly bar pendente lite interest to prevent arbitral award

MANU/SC/0309/2016

Arbitration

An Arbitrator cannot award interest pendente lite if the same is barred expressly by contract. The Supreme Court distinguished an explicit contractual provision such as this from a bar to award interest on delayed payment, which by itself would not preclude the Arbitrator’s authority. It added, “award of pendente lite interest inter alia must depend upon the overall intention of the agreement and what is expressly excluded.”

Relevant : State of Orissa v. B.N. Agarwalla MANU/SC/0204/1997 Tehri Hydro Development Corporation Limited and Anr. v. Jai Prakash Associates Limited MANU/SC/0806/2012 Section 31 Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996

Tags : ARBITRATION   INTEREST   AWARD   PENDENTE LITE  

Share :        

Disclaimer | Copyright 2026 - All Rights Reserved