<?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>2010 (8) TMI 1086 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=195354</link>
    <description>Clause 16(2) of the General Conditions of Contract expressly barred interest on earnest money, security deposit and amounts payable under the contract. On that basis, interest on the sums covered by claim No. 4 and claim No. 6 was contractually prohibited. Section 31(7)(a) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 permits interest for the period from accrual of the cause of action to the award only where the parties have not agreed otherwise. Earlier decisions under the Arbitration Act, 1940 were held inapplicable because the 1996 Act contains its own statutory scheme on interest. The arbitral tribunal therefore lacked authority to grant pre-reference interest, and its refusal of pendente lite interest was sustained.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 20 Aug 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 10 Aug 2023 09:49:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=493717" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2010 (8) TMI 1086 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=195354</link>
      <description>Clause 16(2) of the General Conditions of Contract expressly barred interest on earnest money, security deposit and amounts payable under the contract. On that basis, interest on the sums covered by claim No. 4 and claim No. 6 was contractually prohibited. Section 31(7)(a) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 permits interest for the period from accrual of the cause of action to the award only where the parties have not agreed otherwise. Earlier decisions under the Arbitration Act, 1940 were held inapplicable because the 1996 Act contains its own statutory scheme on interest. The arbitral tribunal therefore lacked authority to grant pre-reference interest, and its refusal of pendente lite interest was sustained.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 20 Aug 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=195354</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>