Topic
The Supreme Court held that an express contractual bar on interest (Clause 54 GCC) absolutely bars pre-reference interest, overriding Section 31(7) of the Arbitration Act. It upholds party autonomy, affecting contractors and employers drafting GCC terms.
The Uttarakhand State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission held that a claimant cannot receive both interest on compensation and separate mental agony damages under the Consumer Protection Act, setting aside a ₹5,000 mental agony award while affirming ₹2 lakh personal accident cover with 6% interest from October 2017. The decision bars double recovery for the same loss, affecting consumers seeking overlapping relief in insurance-linked complaints.
Insurers may not rely on informal security measures not written into the policy to deny coverage, and a corporate entity is recognised as a consumer under the Consumer Protection Act. The commission awarded the claimant Rs 44.53 lakh with interest and costs. This ruling mandates that policy exclusions be expressly documented and extends consumer protections to corporate borrowers.
The Delhi High Court rejected the Section 34 challenge to the 2018 arbitral award on the Safdarjung Tomb illumination contract, reiterating that awards can be set aside only on the narrow grounds enumerated in the Arbitration Act. This reinforces limited judicial interference, affecting parties seeking to overturn commercial arbitration outcomes.
The Delhi High Court affirmed that Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act permits setting aside an award only on patent illegality or public-policy grounds. Consequently, the appellant’s force-majeure claim and interest-rate dispute were dismissed, narrowing set-aside avenues for parties in commercial and real-estate arbitrations.
Delhi HC rejected NHAI’s Section 34 challenge, confirming the arbitral award of 10% p.a. interest compounded monthly. It held that jurisdictional objections must be raised promptly and that consent to arbitrate precludes later attacks. The decision safeguards interest awards and clarifies procedural timing for parties in arbitration.
Punjab and Haryana High Court holds that interest on motor accident compensation is discretionary under Section 171 MV Act, not automatic, and must be just and reasonable.