<?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>2022 (9) TMI 108 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=427163</link>
    <description>Section 31(7)(b) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 leaves the arbitral tribunal discretion to award post-award interest on part of the awarded sum, and the phrase &quot;unless the award otherwise directs&quot; qualifies only the rate when the award is silent. Section 31(7)(a) separately governs the tribunal&#039;s discretion on pre-award interest, including the rate, quantum and period. The earlier view in S. L. Arora was overruled to the extent it denied interest on interest, while Hyder Consulting confirmed that the merged amount may constitute the &quot;sum&quot; for post-award interest. The tribunal&#039;s decision to confine post-award interest to the principal amount was therefore upheld, and no interference was warranted.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 01 Sep 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 15 May 2025 16:46:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=689623" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2022 (9) TMI 108 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=427163</link>
      <description>Section 31(7)(b) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 leaves the arbitral tribunal discretion to award post-award interest on part of the awarded sum, and the phrase &quot;unless the award otherwise directs&quot; qualifies only the rate when the award is silent. Section 31(7)(a) separately governs the tribunal&#039;s discretion on pre-award interest, including the rate, quantum and period. The earlier view in S. L. Arora was overruled to the extent it denied interest on interest, while Hyder Consulting confirmed that the merged amount may constitute the &quot;sum&quot; for post-award interest. The tribunal&#039;s decision to confine post-award interest to the principal amount was therefore upheld, and no interference was warranted.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 01 Sep 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=427163</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>