https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=459045 In a challenge to an arbitral award, the HC held that the jurisdictional objection based on absence of an arbitration agreement could not succeed because the existence of the arbitration clause had already been determined at the Section 11 stage. Compensation for delay, price escalation, idling charges and hire charges was sustained where the employer-caused delay prevented timely completion, even without express contractual escalation clauses. The pre-award interest rate of 12% was found excessive on the facts and was reduced to 9%. Interest on the interest component was upheld as permissible under the statutory scheme. The award was therefore substantially affirmed, with only limited interference on interest. en-us Wed, 19 Aug 2020 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 27 Nov 2024 18:34:58 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=459045 In a challenge to an arbitral award, the HC held that the jurisdictional objection based on absence of an arbitration agreement could not succeed because the existence of the arbitration clause had already been determined at the Section 11 stage. Compensation for delay, price escalation, idling charges and hire charges was sustained where the employer-caused delay prevented timely completion, even without express contractual escalation clauses. The pre-award interest rate of 12% was found excessive on the facts and was reduced to 9%. Interest on the interest component was upheld as permissible under the statutory scheme. The award was therefore substantially affirmed, with only limited interference on interest. Case-Laws Indian Laws Wed, 19 Aug 2020 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=459045