<?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 (7) TMI 1219 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=171039</link>
    <description>A contractual stipulation to pay not less than fair wages, read with later statutory wage revisions taking retrospective effect, supported an implied obligation to reimburse the contractor for increased wage costs during the subsistence of the agreement, so enhanced rates for that period were upheld. An express clause barring interest for delay in payment displaced the arbitrator&#039;s usual power to grant pre-reference and pendente lite interest on claims arising under the contract, so such interest was disallowed for the contractual-period claim. That bar did not apply in the same manner to work continued after termination at the administration&#039;s request, so interest on the post-termination claim was sustained, with post-award interest to run on the recalculated sum.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 16 Jul 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 02 Nov 2015 08:04:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=389657" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2009 (7) TMI 1219 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=171039</link>
      <description>A contractual stipulation to pay not less than fair wages, read with later statutory wage revisions taking retrospective effect, supported an implied obligation to reimburse the contractor for increased wage costs during the subsistence of the agreement, so enhanced rates for that period were upheld. An express clause barring interest for delay in payment displaced the arbitrator&#039;s usual power to grant pre-reference and pendente lite interest on claims arising under the contract, so such interest was disallowed for the contractual-period claim. That bar did not apply in the same manner to work continued after termination at the administration&#039;s request, so interest on the post-termination claim was sustained, with post-award interest to run on the recalculated sum.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 16 Jul 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=171039</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>