Mr. Yogendra Singh vs M/S Shri Ram Transport Finance Co. Ltd on 28 January, 2022
In my view, the rate of interest
which has been awarded by the learned arbitrator is a
deterrent for the award debtors for using it as a delaying
tactic to ward off their liability. It would be hardly resulting
in equalization of the value for money. Reliance with regard
to upholding the rate of interest in the instant case, can be
placed on number of judgments of the Apex Court which
would warrant that the rate of interest need not be tinkered
with. Reference is made in this regard to State of Haryana vs.
S.L. Arora and Company; (2010) 3 SCC 690, Bhagawati
Oxygen Ltd. vs. Hindustan Copper Ltd. AIR 2005 SC 2071,
Bihar Sponge Iron Ltd. (BSIL) vs. Rail India Technical &
Economic Services Ltd. (RITES); 132 (2006) DLT 489, M/s.
Sayeed Ahmed & Co. vs. State of U.P.; (2009) 12 SCC 26,
M/s. Maharashtra Apex Corporation Ltd. vs. Sandesh Kumar
& Ors.; AIR 2006 Karnataka 138, M/s. Steeman Ltd. vs. The
State of Himachal Pradesh & Ors.; (1997) CLT 123 (SC),
Modi Rubber Ltd. vs. Morgan Securities & Credits Pvt. Ltd.
& Anr.; 165 (2009) DLT 113, Municipal Committee, Patiala
vs. Krishan Kumar Bansal; 2002 (3) RAJ 15 (pg.4)"