LawforAll

Friday, April 23, 2021

When the contract did not prohibit the award of interest in respect of delayed payment in local currency component specified therein. - it can be granted .- This being the position, in our opinion, the contrary view expressed by the Arbitration Court in a proceeding under Section 34 of the Act, which view was upheld by the Appellate forum, breaches the permissible boundaries for encroaching upon an award as laid down in Saw Pipes case (supra). When the agreement is silent on the point of rate of interest but provides for payment of interest on delayed payment, simple interest at 8% per annum is a reasonable one - .the Tribunal’s exercise of fixing the rate should have been on the basis of applying the principle laid down in 19 paragraph 43.1. in the case of G.C. Roy (supra). The said principle is applicable in a proceeding under the 1996 Act as well. This principle has been broadly incorporated in Section 31(7) (a) of the 1996 Act. The only difference between the situation contemplated in the aforesaid provision and the facts of this case is that the agreement involved is not silent on interest entitlement of the appellants on delayed payment but the agreement contains provision for such payment. Only the rate at which interest would be payable remained unspecified. In our view, simple interest at the rate of 8% would be just and equitable on the sum left unpaid, calculated otherwise on the basis of sub­paragraphs 1.6. to 1.8 of the award.

  When the contract did not prohibit the award of interest in   respect   of   delayed   payment   in   local   currency   component specifi...