Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

23. The contention of the learned counsel for the claimants is that the Tribunal has awarded interest at 6 per cent per annum only if the compensation was not deposited within two months. It was pointed out that interest is awarded from the date of default of such payment and that the direction in regard to payment of interest is not correct. We find much force in the contention of the learned counsel for the claimants. In this connection, the learned counsel for the claimants drew the attention of this court to the decisions in Narcinva V. Kamat v. Alfredo Antonio Doe Martins 1985 ACJ 397 (SC), Chameti Wati v. Delhi Municipal Corporation 1985 ACJ 645 (SC), Jagbir Singh v. General Manager, Punjab Roadways 1987 ACJ 15 (SC) and Indrani v. S. Ramalingam 1989 ACJ 1007 (Madras) and submitted that the Tribunal ought to have awarded interest at least from the date of petition when the claim was made. In Chameli Wati v. Delhi Municipal Corporation (supra), it was held as follows:

In Indrani v. S. Ramalingam 1989 ACJ 1007 (Madras), a Division Bench of this court allowed interest at the rate of 12 per cent per annum from the date of the petition. It is needless to multiply the various decisions of the Supreme Court and other High Courts on this subject and it will suffice to state that it has been uniformly held that the claimants are entitled to interest from the date of petition till the date of payment at 12 per cent per annum. Accordingly the order passed by the court below directing payment of interest at 6 per cent per annum from the date of default of payment of the money in pursuance of the award is hereby modified and instead, the respondents are directed to pay interest in respect of the amount payable by them at 12 per-cent per annum from the date of petition till the date of payment and the award has to be modified accordingly.