IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
Arbitration Appeal No.1 of 2009
M/s Luxmi Industries, Lohardaga …..Appellant
Versus
M/s Steel Authority of India Ltd. New Delhi & anr…… Respondents
CORAM : HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE
…..
For the Appellant : Mr.Atanu Banerjee,Adv.
For the Respondents : Mr.Ananda Sen,Adv.
th
Dated 12 September , 2011
By Court This appeal has been preferred under Section 37 of the
Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996 against the order dated 19th
December, 2008 passed by the court of Sub JudgeII, Lohardaga in
Title Arbitration Suit No.17 of 2005, whereby the objection
submitted by the appellant has been dismissed.
2. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the learned
Arbitrator did not award the interest over the delayed payment of
the earnest money. However, it appears from the award that at
internal page12 of the award , the learned Arbitrator has awarded
the interest on earnest money deposited by stating that appellant
shall be entitled to interest @ 10% per annum on 1st January, 1997
to the date of award on the delayed payment of earnest money.
There is a reference of the claim of the appellant with respect to
interest on account of the delayed payment of earnest money, which
had been taken note of by the learned Arbitrator at page5 , in item
no.4. Therefore, if the amount of the earnest money has been paid
to be appellant after it became due then he has been awarded
interest @ 10% per annum. Therefore, in view of the above reasons,
I do not find the contention of the appellant that it has been
2.
denied interest over the late payment of earnest money. If petitioner
has not get yet the said amount, it is free to get the amount by
executing the award.
3. Learned counsel for the appellant raised doubt because of the
reason that Arbitrator observed “amounts found due” and, therefore,
it may be made clear that the amounts found due by the Arbitrator
is in relation to the earnest money amount, which has been found
due in the award. The claim of appellant is based on Clause 4.5.3 of
the Annual Booking Scheme. This apprehension of the appellant has
no basis because of the reason that awarding of interest on delayed
payment of the earnest money and acceptance of the plea of the
contractorappellant that it is entitled to interest @ 10% on delayed
payment of earnest money, clearly indicate that such right of interest
over the delayed payment of earnest money has been recognized.
Therefore, if there is a confusion, now it stands clarified by this
order.
4. In view of the above reasons, the appeal of the appellant is
disposed of with the above observation.
( Prakash Tatia, C.J.)
G.Jha/