Supreme Court: Foreign Companies’ Head Office Expenses in India are Capped under Section 44C  ||  SC Directs Trial Courts to Systematically Catalogue Witnesses and Evidence in Criminal Judgments  ||  SC Calls For Sensitising Future Generations on Equality in Marriage to Combat Dowry Practices  ||  SC: Separate Suits Against Confirmed Auction Sales are Barred; Remedy Available under Sec 47  ||  NCLT Mumbai: Oppression Claims Against Majority Shareholders Do not Justify Winding up a Company  ||  J&K&L HC Rules it Illegal and Inequitable to Deny Regularisation to a Daily Wager After 34 Years  ||  J&K&L High Court: Revisional Powers Must Be Used Within Reasonable Time; Merits Don’t Justify Delay  ||  Supreme Court: Compassionate Appointees Cannot Later Claim Entitlement to a Higher Post  ||  NCLAT New Delhi: Insolvency Pleas Cannot Be Admitted When Information Utility Records Show a Dispute  ||  NCLAT: Issuing Cheques For Another Entity’s Liabilities Does not Constitute Operational Debt    

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 2025 - All Rights Reserved