Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 3 of 3 (0.16 seconds)

Jaiprakash Associates Ltd. ... vs Tehri Hydro Development Corporation ... on 7 February, 2019

21. There is no provision in the Agreement which prohibits award of interest. Thus, the decision in Jaiprakash Associates Ltd. Through Its Director v. Tehri Hydero Development Corporation India Ltd. Through Its Director (supra) is clearly inapplicable. In that case, the challenge to the arbitral award was sustained as the contract between the parties prohibited grant of any interest. Clearly, award of interest contrary to the express terms of the agreement between the parties would be susceptible to challenge under Section 34 of the A&C Act. But since there is no agreement proscribing award of interest, the award of interest cannot be faulted.
Supreme Court of India Cites 23 - Cited by 59 - A K Sikri - Full Document

Punjab State Civil Supplies ... vs Ganpati Rice Mills on 20 October, 2021

20. The contention that the arbitral award is vitiated as the Arbitral Tribunal has awarded exorbitant interest is equally unmerited. The Arbitral Tribunal has awarded interest at the rate of 12% per annum. The same cannot be considered by any stretch of imagination as exorbitant. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in a recent decision in Punjab State Civil Supplies Corporation Limited (PUNSUP) and Anr. v Ganpati Rice Mills: SLP (C) 36655 of 2016, decided on 20.10.2021, has held that the Arbitral Tribunal has wide discretion in awarding interest under Section Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:DUSHYANT O.M.P.(COMM.) 432/2019 Page 8 of 11 RAWAL 31(7)(a) of the A&C Act and the impugned award cannot be interfered with except on the ground as set out in Section 34 of the A&C Act.
Supreme Court - Daily Orders Cites 4 - Cited by 9 - Full Document
1