Summary
The Court upheld entitlement to statutory post-award interest but rejected compounding introduced during execution. The final arbitral award simply prescribed seven per cent annual interest and did not authorise yearly or quarterly capitalisation. Neither the executing court nor the revisional court could add that benefit. The Court directed seven per cent simple interest for both the pre-award and post-award periods.
Issues
- Whether the award holders were entitled to post-award interest under Section 31(7)(b).
- Whether an award prescribing annual interest without capitalisation could be executed with yearly or quarterly rests.
Provisions considered
- Section 31(7)(a) and (b), Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996Affirmed the statutory post-award benefit and directed that the applicable interest be calculated as simple interest at seven per cent annually. (¶¶ 7, 8, 9, 10, 11)
Held
- The High Court correctly recognised the award holders’ entitlement to post-award interest under the governing precedent in Hyder Consulting. (¶ 7)
- The award had attained finality after challenges at three levels and did not specify capitalisation. Execution could not add to or alter its operative directions. (¶ 8)
- Both yearly rests adopted by the executing court and quarterly rests substituted by the High Court wrongly introduced compound interest. A bare direction for seven per cent annual interest meant simple interest in this award. (¶¶ 9, 10)
- Pre-award interest was to be calculated at seven per cent simple interest. The post-award statutory benefit also carried seven per cent annual simple interest. (¶ 11)
Result
Appeals partly allowed, directing seven per cent annual simple interest for both pre-award and post-award periods. No order as to costs.