https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=781861 SC upheld the HC's order dismissing the Section 34 challenge and affirmed rejection of the appellants' Section 37 appeal, holding that post-award interest under Section 31(7)(b) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 is mandatory, with arbitral discretion limited to fixing the rate. In the absence of any contractual bar, the arbitrator had jurisdiction to award interest, including post-award interest, at 24% p.a. The rate, though high, was not contrary to public policy, fundamental policy of Indian law, or basic notions of morality or justice, nor so perverse as to shock the conscience. The plea based on the Usurious Loans Act, 1918 was rejected. The appeal was dismissed. en-us Tue, 18 Nov 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 22 Nov 2025 07:36:32 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=781861 SC upheld the HC's order dismissing the Section 34 challenge and affirmed rejection of the appellants' Section 37 appeal, holding that post-award interest under Section 31(7)(b) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 is mandatory, with arbitral discretion limited to fixing the rate. In the absence of any contractual bar, the arbitrator had jurisdiction to award interest, including post-award interest, at 24% p.a. The rate, though high, was not contrary to public policy, fundamental policy of Indian law, or basic notions of morality or justice, nor so perverse as to shock the conscience. The plea based on the Usurious Loans Act, 1918 was rejected. The appeal was dismissed. Case-Laws Indian Laws Tue, 18 Nov 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=781861