The court determined that the appellant was not a buyer under the Interest Act, thus not liable for interest on delayed payments.

1. As noted in order dated 10th July, 2017, the regular Bench presided over by the Hon'ble Shri Justice Naresh H. Patil is unable to hear this Appeal. Therefore, as per the general standing order issued by the Hon'ble the Chief Justice, the Appeal will have to be heard by this Bench. Only in view of the order of the Apex Court dated 9th January, 2015 that we have given out of turn priority to the hearing of this Appeal filed in the year 2013.

2. This Appeal arises out of a Petition under S.34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (for short "the Arbitration Act"). The arbitral proceedings arose out of a claim made by the respondent for grant of interest under the provisions of the Interest of Delayed Payments to Small Scale and Ancillary Industrial Undertakings Act, 1993 (for short "the Interest Act").

3. With a view to appreciate the factual and legal controversy, a reference to few factual aspects will be necessary. The respondent has been duly registered as a Small Scale Industrial Unit. The respondent is having a certificate to that effect issued by the Government of Maharashtra through the Directorate of Industries on 28th August, 1989. The appellant is the Maharashtra Small Scale Industrial Development Corporation Limited which is an undertaking of the Government of Maharashtra. The Maharashtra State Electricity Board (for short "MSEB") issued a work order to the appellant for supply, transportation, providing laying and testing of ash disposal pipelines for Part B for Chandrapur Thermal Power Station at Chandrapur. The work order was issued on 27th March, 1995. On the basis of the work order, a supply order was issued by the appellant to the respondent on 30th March, 1995. According to the case of the respondent, the supply order was implemented by the respondent. It is alleged that inspite of the fact that goods were delivered in various consignments in excellent condition and were received by MSEB, the appellant failed and neglected to make payment of the price of the said goods as agreed within 10 days from the submission of the bills. The respondent relied upon the provisions of the Interest Act and in particular S.2(c), S.3, S.4, S.7, S.9 and S.10. It is the case of the respondent that under the Interest Act, it is the statutory liability of the appellant to pay interest as provided in S.4 of the Interest Act. Reliance is placed on the Government Resolution dated 6th August, 1997 which according to the respondent provides that the appellant is liable to pay interest on overdue amount. As the interest was not paid, the respondent by its Advocate's notice dated 21st December, 2001 called upon the appellant to refer the dispute to the arbitration as provided in Clause 27 of the supply order. There was some dispute regarding the appointment of an arbitrator between the parties. Ultimately, by consent of the parties, the learned single Judge of this Court by order dated 21st June, 2002 appointed a retired Judge as the sole Arbitrator. A statement of claim was filed by the respondent before the Arbitrator claiming interest amount of Rs.78,19,540.73 together with interest thereon @ 24% on the said amount from the date of filing of the statement of claim. Reply, rejoinder and surrejoinder were filed before the learned Arbitrator. It