<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2009 (10) TMI 530 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=113971</link>
    <description>The Supreme Court allowed the appeal, setting aside the orders of the District Judge and Single Judge of the High Court under section 39 of the Arbitration Act, 1940. The Court clarified arbitrators&#039; power to award interest at different stages and emphasized the entitlement to interest if an amount is wrongfully withheld. It highlighted the need for non-discrimination in awarding interest and directed the respondent to bear litigation costs.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 19 Oct 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 06 Oct 2016 11:33:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=150977" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2009 (10) TMI 530 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=113971</link>
      <description>The Supreme Court allowed the appeal, setting aside the orders of the District Judge and Single Judge of the High Court under section 39 of the Arbitration Act, 1940. The Court clarified arbitrators&#039; power to award interest at different stages and emphasized the entitlement to interest if an amount is wrongfully withheld. It highlighted the need for non-discrimination in awarding interest and directed the respondent to bear litigation costs.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 19 Oct 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=113971</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>