SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2024 Supreme(SC) 838

PAMIDIGHANTAM SRI NARASIMHA, SANDEEP MEHTA
R. P. Garg – Appellant
Versus
Chief General Manager, Telecom Department – Respondent


Advocates appeared:
For the Petitioner(s): Mr. Parikshit Mahipal, Adv. Mr. Vaibhav Kumar Garg, Adv. Ms. Savita Garg, Adv. Ms. Shivani Mahipal, Adv. Ms. Bushra Parveen, AOR
For the Respondent(s): Mr. Pradeep Kumar Mathur, AOR Chiranjeev Johri, Adv. Mr. M.K. Tiwari, Adv.

Judgement Key Points

Key Points: - Post-award interest shall be payable on sums directed by an arbitral award; rate can be provided by the Arbitrator and in default statutory prescription will apply. (!) - Post-award interest is not subject to contract between the parties; a contractual prohibition does not bar post-award interest. (!) (!) - Section 31(7)(a) governs pre-award interest, which is subject to the arbitration agreement unless otherwise agreed by the parties. (!) (!) - Section 31(7)(b) provides post-award interest on sums directed to be paid, with the rate determined by the arbitrator or by statutory prescription if not specified; it is not contractually overridable. (!) (!) - The award in question should carry post-award interest from the date of the award to realization, at the rate determined (default 18% per the appellate decision). (!) (!) - High Court’s interpretation that contract prohibition defeats post-award interest is erroneous; post-award interest depends on statutory framework, not contract. (!) (!) - The decision restores the appellate court’s grant of 18% post-award interest and reverses the High Court’s revision. (!) - The parties shall bear their own costs. (!)

What is the entitlement to post-award interest under Section 31(7) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act?

What is the effect of contractual clauses on post-award interest versus statutory entitlement under Section 31(7)?

What is the correct interpretation of Section 31(7)(a) and Section 31(7)(b) regarding pre-award and post-award interest?


JUDGMENT :

PAMIDIGHANTAM SRI NARASIMHA, J.

1. Leave granted.

2. The short question before us is whether the appellant is entitled to post award interest on the sum awarded by the Arbitrator. The Arbitrator denied payment of such interest under a misplaced impression that the contract between the parties prohibited it. The executing Court1[Order in M.A No. 19 of 2001 dated 10.10.2002.] affirmed the finding of the Arbitrator and rejected the prayer. However, allowing the appeal, the District Court2[Order passed by the District Judge in Civil Appeal no.86 of 11.11.2002 dated 04.03.2003] held that the appellant will be entitled to post award interest. By the order impugned before us, the High Court3[Order dated 14.05.2019 passed by the High Court of Punjab and Haryana in Civil Revision No. 2561 of 2003] allowed the revision and set aside the District Court order while holding that the contract between the parties did not permit grant of post award interest.

2.1 For the reasons to follow, while allowing the appeal we have held that as this is a case arising out of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 19964[Hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’], by operation of Section 31(7)(b), the sum dir

    Click Here to Read the rest of this document
    1
    2
    3
    4
    5
    6
    7
    8
    9
    10
    11
    SupremeToday Portrait Ad
    supreme today icon
    logo-black

    An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

    Please visit our Training & Support
    Center or Contact Us for assistance

    qr

    Scan Me!

    India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

    For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

    whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
    whatsapp-icon Back to top