Order ;

1. Heard learned Counsel for the parties.

2. This appeal has been filed against the impugned judgment dated 30.11.2004 passed by the Delhi High court. The facts in detail have been set out in the impugned judgment and hence we are not repeating the same here. The dispute in this case is about interest. The submission of Mr. Gaurab Banerji, learned Additional Solicitor General for the Appellant is that interest can only be awarded from the date of the award and not before the date of award, in view of Clause 3.3(ix) of the General Conditions of Contract (GCC) which states as follows:

No interest shall be payable by the Employer on Earnest Money, Security Deposit or on any money due to the Contractor by the Employer.

3. In support of his proposition, Mr. Banerji has relied upon the judgment of this Court in Sayeed Ahmed & Co. v. State of U.P. and Ors., 2009 (9) SCALE 261.

4. On the other hand, Mr. P.S. Narasimha, learned senior Counsel for the Respondent has submitted that Clause 3.3(ix) has to be read ejusdem generis and hence a literal interpretation cannot be given to the words "or on any money due to the contractor by the employer". We do not agree with the same. It is settled