Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query.....!
Analysing the retrieved Case Laws
Scanned Judgements…!
Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query.....!
Analysing the retrieved Case Laws
Scanned Judgements…!
Non-grant of interest from the date of award till the petitioner approached the court is generally not justified. Courts have consistently held that interest should be awarded from the date it becomes due, often from the date of possession, entitlement, or award, unless explicitly barred by law or agreement. The absence of specific interest for the entire period from the date of award or possession is often challenged and found unjustified ["Iqbal Ahmed S/o Late M. Rehman Khan vs State Of Karnataka - Karnataka"]; ["ABL International Ltd. and Another v. Export Credit Guarantee Corpn. India Ltd. and Others - Supreme Court"]; ["M/S KHUBI RAM RAJIV KUMAR & CO THR PARTNER RAM AVTAR BANSAL Vs M/S NAVEEN ENTERPRISES & ORS - Delhi"].
Courts emphasize that the entitlement to interest depends on the circumstances, including whether interest was claimed, whether the award or agreement specifies interest, and whether the delay in payment warrants interest from the date of entitlement. For example, interest at rates like 9%, 12%, 18%, or higher is awarded based on the nature of the transaction, delay, and legal provisions, but courts have also noted that interest from the date of award or possession is not automatic if the award or law does not specify it ["M/S KHUBI RAM RAJIV KUMAR & CO THR PARTNER RAM AVTAR BANSAL Vs M/S NAVEEN ENTERPRISES & ORS - Delhi"]; ["Oil And Natural Gas Corporation Ltd. VS G & T Beckfield Drilling Services Pvt. Ltd. - Supreme Court"]; ["B. KAPOOR VS UNION OF INDIA THROUGH: SR. DEN/C/NORTHERN RAILWAY - Delhi"]; ["B. Kapoor vs Union of India - Delhi"].
Many judgments clarify that the courts have discretion regarding the period for which interest is awarded. If the award or contract is silent on interest, courts may award interest from the date of possession, entitlement, or award, but not necessarily from the cause of action or earlier dates, unless justified. For instance, interest awarded from the date of possession or award, but not from earlier dates, is common practice unless the law or facts suggest otherwise ["B. KAPOOR VS UNION OF INDIA THROUGH: SR. DEN/C/NORTHERN RAILWAY - Delhi"]; ["B. Kapoor vs Union of India - Delhi"]; ["M. Venkata Reddy, S/o. Pulla Reddy VS State Bank of India, Rep. by Chief Manager - Andhra Pradesh"].
Several cases highlight that when the petitioner approaches the court after a delay in payment, interest from the date of award or from the date the amount became due is justified, especially if the delay was attributable to the respondent or due to statutory provisions. Conversely, if the delay is not attributable, courts may deny interest from earlier dates ["Iqbal Ahmed S/o Late M. Rehman Khan vs State Of Karnataka - Karnataka"]; ["ABL International Ltd. and Another v. Export Credit Guarantee Corpn. India Ltd. and Others - Supreme Court"]; ["RIICO VS Suman Setiya - Rajasthan"].
Analysis and Conclusion:The provided sources collectively establish that non-grant of interest from the date of award or possession until the petitioner approached the court is generally not justified, especially when the law, contract, or circumstances warrant interest from the date the amount became due or the petitioner’s entitlement. Courts tend to award interest from the date of possession, cause of action, or award, unless explicitly barred, and emphasize that the delay in payment warrants such interest. The consistent legal stance is that interest should be awarded from the date it becomes due, not arbitrarily withheld, and courts have the discretion to determine the period and rate based on the facts of each case ["Iqbal Ahmed S/o Late M. Rehman Khan vs State Of Karnataka - Karnataka"]; ["ABL International Ltd. and Another v. Export Credit Guarantee Corpn. India Ltd. and Others - Supreme Court"]; ["M/S KHUBI RAM RAJIV KUMAR & CO THR PARTNER RAM AVTAR BANSAL Vs M/S NAVEEN ENTERPRISES & ORS - Delhi"]; ["B. KAPOOR VS UNION OF INDIA THROUGH: SR. DEN/C/NORTHERN RAILWAY - Delhi"].
References:- The court held that the non-grant of interest from the date of award till the petitioner approached the court was not justified. ["Iqbal Ahmed S/o Late M. Rehman Khan vs State Of Karnataka - Karnataka"]- Interest at 12% from the date of the claim till the date of payment was awarded, indicating that interest is generally awarded from the date it becomes due. ["ABL International Ltd. and Another v. Export Credit Guarantee Corpn. India Ltd. and Others - Supreme Court"]- Interest from the date of possession or entitlement, but not necessarily from the date of award, is awarded depending on the case. ["M/S KHUBI RAM RAJIV KUMAR & CO THR PARTNER RAM AVTAR BANSAL Vs M/S NAVEEN ENTERPRISES & ORS - Delhi"]- Courts have discretion to award interest from the date of possession or award, especially if delay is attributable to the respondent. ["B. KAPOOR VS UNION OF INDIA THROUGH: SR. DEN/C/NORTHERN RAILWAY - Delhi"]
In the realm of arbitration and civil disputes in India, one common grievance arises: the non-grant of interest from the date of the award till the date when the petitioner approached the court. Is this denial justified? Generally, no. Indian courts and legal principles emphasize that interest should typically be awarded from the date of the award until realization to compensate for the delay in payment, barring specific contractual or statutory restrictions. This blog post delves into the legal foundations, judicial precedents, exceptions, and practical insights to help you understand this critical aspect of dispute resolution.
Whether you're a contractor awaiting payment, a business involved in arbitration, or simply navigating legal claims, grasping post-award interest can safeguard your rights. Note: This is general information based on established precedents and not specific legal advice. Consult a qualified lawyer for your case.
The non-grant of interest from the date of the award till the date the petitioner approached the court is generally not justified under Indian law. Courts recognize interest as compensation for the period the awarded amount remains unpaid. As held in key judgments, interest on the principal amount should be granted from the date of the award till realization Coal Linker VS Coal India Ltd. - 2009 7 Supreme 623.
This principle aligns with statutory provisions like Section 34 of the Civil Procedure Code (CPC) and Section 3 of the Interest Act, which empower courts to award interest from the decree or award date until payment, unless prohibited I. K. Merchants Pvt. Ltd. VS State of Rajasthan - 2025 3 Supreme 714. Denying such interest without basis is often deemed erroneous Oil And Natural Gas Commission VS Mc Clelland Engineers S. A - 1999 4 Supreme 235.
Interest post-award serves as equitable compensation for the deprivation of funds. The Supreme Court has clarified that it extends from the award date until actual payment Coal Linker VS Coal India Ltd. - 2009 7 Supreme 623. Here's a breakdown:
Multiple decisions reinforce this stance. For instance, courts hold that denying post-award interest without contractual basis is unjustified Coal Linker VS Coal India Ltd. - 2009 7 Supreme 623Oil And Natural Gas Commission VS Mc Clelland Engineers S. A - 1999 4 Supreme 235. In one case, the court directed interest at 9% from the award date till realization due to non-compliance Sat Narain Gupta VS CTC Limited - 2007 Supreme(Del) 383.
The Arbitrator having given a finding that the contractor is entitled to interest ought to have granted interest for the period i.e., from the date of the decree till the date of realization. STATE OF A. P. VS KAPA BABU RAO - 1999 Supreme(AP) 1164
Under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996:- Tribunals must provide reasons if rejecting interest claims from cause of action till award Emmson Gulf Dmcc VS National Cooperative Consumer Federation of India Ltd. - 2023 Supreme(Del) 2854.- Post-award interest on the total sum (principal + pre-award interest) is standard, as clarified in rulings upholding arbitrator clarifications North Delhi Municipal Corporation VS S. A. Builders Ltd. - 2024 Supreme(SC) 1197.- In execution proceedings, courts modify awards to include interest from award till realization at rates like 9% G. D. Tiwari & Co. VS Delhi Development Authority - 2006 Supreme(Del) 925.
High Courts have also intervened where awards were silent or restrictive. For example, in a Delhi High Court matter, interest was granted from the award date despite arbitrator's pre-award denial B. KAPOOR vs UNION OF INDIA THROUGH: SR.DEN/C/NORTHERN RAILWAY 2016_DHC_1212.
Even in employment cases, non-compliance with awards triggers interest from the award date. One tribunal directed 9% interest on back wages from award till final payment Sat Narain Gupta VS CTC Limited - 2007 Supreme(Del) 383. In gratuity claims, interest at 10% was upheld for the full service period till superannuation Managing Director, Odisha State Cooperative Bank Ltd, Bhubaneswar vs Managobinda Barik - 2025 Supreme(Online)(Ori) 6420.
While the default is to award interest, exceptions exist:
This Court can grant interest from the date of the award till the date of realisation. All that can be said is that from the date of the award till the date of realisation the appropriate interest should be at the rate of 9% per annum. G. D. Tiwari & Co. VS Delhi Development Authority - 2006 Supreme(Del) 925
In bank guarantee disputes, failure to reason interest rejection led to award set-aside Emmson Gulf Dmcc VS National Cooperative Consumer Federation of India Ltd. - 2023 Supreme(Del) 2854.
To navigate this:- Review Contracts: Check for interest-restricting clauses before arbitration.- Demand Reasons: Insist tribunals explain interest rejections Emmson Gulf Dmcc VS National Cooperative Consumer Federation of India Ltd. - 2023 Supreme(Del) 2854.- Seek Court Modification: Approach courts under Section 34 CPC for post-award interest if denied STATE OF A. P. VS KAPA BABU RAO - 1999 Supreme(AP) 1164.- Explicit Clauses: Include clear post-award interest provisions in agreements to avoid disputes.- Timely Action: Promptly enforce awards to minimize interest claims, but petitioners should not delay without cause.
In conclusion, the non-grant of interest from the date of award till the petitioner approaches the court is typically not justified under Indian law, supported by robust precedents and statutes. This ensures fairness in dispute resolution. For tailored advice, engage legal experts familiar with your contract and facts.
#PostAwardInterest, #ArbitrationLawIndia, #LegalInterestAward
No.47563/2016, this Court directed the respondents to consider and disburse the amount to the petitioner, pursuant to which the compensation was eventually paid in 2021, however, interest was not paid. When the petitioner challenged the non-grant of interest in W.P. ... land till the date of payment. ... The petitioner in all the rounds of litigation prior to the present proceedings challenged onl....
It is not possible to contend that the High Court intended to grant interest only for a limited period. In the absence of any such direction, it appears quite patent that the respondent Insurance Company is liable to pay interest @ 12% from the date of the claim till the date of payment. ... For the reasons stated hereinabove, we think the Appellate Bench of the High Court was not justified in rev....
The Apex Court also explained the reason for award of such interest as - the intention behind awarding pre-award interest is primarily to compensate the claimant for the pecuniary loss suffered from the time the cause of action arose till passing of the arbitral award. ... Similarly, the grant of post-award interest also serves a salutary purpose. It primarily acts as a disincentive to the award d....
Arora (supra) that Section 31(7) of the 1996 Act does not require that interest which accrues till the date of the award be included in the sum from the date of the award for calculating the post-award interest. ... It also provides that if the award is silent about interest from the date of award till the date of payment, the....
The Arbitral Tribunal was, therefore, under an obligation to give reasons for rejecting the claim of grant of interest for the period from the date of the cause of action till the date of the Award, if at all it intended to reject such claim. ... In view of the above, as the learned Sole Arbitrator has not given any finding on the claim of the petitioner to the award of interest from the date of t....
from the date of the award till the date of payment. ... On the basis of the discussions that have preceded we, therefore, take the view that the grant of pendente lite interest on the claim of Rs.10,17,461 lakhs is not justified. The award as well as the orders of the courts below are accordingly modified to the aforesaid extent.” ... grant of interest. ... Following three-Judge Bench decision of....
(iv) The counter claim of the petitioner is rejected. (v) The petitioner is directed to pay future interest @ 12% per annum from the date of award till the date of actual realization. ... to consider the question of grant of interest pendent lite and award interest if he finds the claim to be justified. ... The learned trial court has rightly levied the #HL_S....
Act- Cum-Divisional Labour Commissioner, Cuttack, was justified to take into consideration the total period of service of the Opposite Party from the date of his initial engagement (14.11.1991) till the date of his superannuation (31.03.2018), so also award 10% simple interest on the Single Judge maintained by the Division Bench for payment of gratuity with interest @ 6% per annum is not justified. ... and fully justified....
Insofar as the award of interest is concerned, the learned Arbitrator has granted interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of Award till realization, on a specific finding that the petitioner is not entitled to the interest till ... the date of Award. ... On such a finding, even if the petitioner had approached this ....
Insofar as the award of interest is concerned, the learned Arbitrator has granted interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of Award till realization, on a specific finding that the petitioner is not entitled to the interest till ... the date of Award. ... On such a finding, even if the petitioner had approached this ....
Due to non-compliance of the award the petitioner is entitled to interest on the awarded back wages from the date of award till final payment. Accordingly, the respondent is directed to pay nominal rate of interest @ 9% on the total amount payable in terms of award from the date of award till the same is finally paid.
This Court can grant interest from the date of the award till the date of realisation. All that can be said is that from the date of the award till the date of realisation the appropriate interest should be at the rate of 9% per annum. Therefore, even if the Arbitrator has exceeded his jurisdiction in awarding future interest, no objection thereto can be raised. 8. The Arbitrator has awarded interest from 16.5.1990 till the date of realisation.
The Arbitrator having given a finding that the contractor is entitled to interest ought to have granted interest for the period i.e., from the date of the decree till the date of realization. Mr. G. Adisesha Reddy, learned counsel for the respondent submits that he filed C.M.P. No. 15455 of 1999 seeking for a decree from this Court for the interest from the date of the decree till the date of realization which was not granted by the Arbitrator. He relied on the judgment of the Supreme Court reported in Jagdish Rai and Brothers v. Union of India (1999(3) Supreme 22 = 1999(1) Arb. LR 696 (SC))....
Manmohan, learned Counsel for the petitioner relying upon the judgment in Secretary, Irrigation Department and Others v. G. C. Roy, (1992) 1 SCC 508 has argued that as this matter was pending before the Arbitrator, this Court should award interest from the date when the Arbitrator entered upon the reference. In my view, this was not a point for consideration before the Arbitrator and the Arbitrator having been empowered only to consider the grant of interest upto the date of his entering upon the reference, this Court will not go into the question whether the petitioner was entitle....
This observation of the Tribunal being contrary to the settled principle of law cannot be sustained. Nor any fault has been attributed to the appellants for causing delay in the disposal of the proceedings. Perusal of the award shows that the Tribunal directed respondent to deposit the awarded amount within two months failing which interest at the rate of 9% p. a. was to accrue. In the absence of having assigned any reason the Tribunal was not justified in depriving the appellants the award of interest, from the date of the petition till realisation.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
