Kerala HC: Applications under the Muslim Women’s Divorce Act Have a 3-Year Limitation Period  ||  Supreme Court: Property Transferred Before Filing a Suit Cannot be Attached under Order 38 Rule 5  ||  Supreme Court: No Review or Appeal is Maintainable Against an Order Appointing an Arbitrator  ||  SC: Terminated Contract is Not a Corporate Debtor’s Asset and a Moratorium Cannot Revive it  ||  SC: Cheque Dishonour Complaints Must be Filed at the Payee’s Home Branch under S.142(2)(A)  ||  Supreme Court: Bail Cannot be Granted Solely on Parity; Accused’s Specific Role Must be Assessed  ||  Kerala HC Upholds Life Terms For Five, Acquits Two in Renjith Johnson Murder, Says TIP Not Needed  ||  Kerala HC Orders Emergency Electric Fencing at Tribal School to Address Rising Wildlife Conflict  ||  Madras HC: Arbitrator Can’t Pierce Corporate Veil to Bind Non-Signatory and Partly Sets Aside Award  ||  Calcutta HC: Post-Award Claim For Municipal Tax Reimbursement is Not Maintainable under Section 9    

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