LexCOAL LINKER versus COAL INDIA LIMITED
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
(2009) 14 (ADDL.) S.C.R. 155 COAL LINKER A ;. v. COAL INDIA LIMITED (Civil Appeal No. 1146 of 2003) SEPTEMBER 7, 2009 B [MARKANDEY KAT JU AND ASOK KUMAR GANGULY, JJ.] )- Arbitration Act, 1940 - ss. 29, 17 and 30 - Pendente lite interest .,.., Power of court to grant - Arbitrator while passing c award granting interest for pre award period but not for post award period-from. the date of award till the date of the decree - -Awardee instead of filing objection to the award uls. 30, filing application u/s. 17 for decree in terms of the award - ·"' Executing court passing decree and directing payment of D ... > interest from the date of award till the date of decree - Correctness of - Held: Not correct - Executing court could not have gone beyond the award and granted interest for the post award period - Thus, it went beyond its jurisdiction and passed decree which is a nullity. E Parties entered into a work contract. Disputes arose ~- between the parties and was referred to the arbitrator. Arbitrator passed an award and granted interest to the appellant for the pre-reference period and during pendency of the arbitration proceedings but not after the F date of award till the date of the decree. Respondent challenged the same but was unsuccessful. Appellant filed application u/s. 17 of the Arbitration Act, 1940 for passing decree in terms of the award. Single Judge of High Court passed a decree, confirming the award. It G directed payment of interest from the date of the award till the date of the decree. Both the Single Judge and the Division Bench of High Court set aside the order of the 155 156 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2009] 14 (ADDL.) S.C.R. A executing court directing payment of interest from the date of the award till the date of the decree. Hence the ' present appeal. Dismissing the appeal, the Court B HELD: In the instant case, interest has been granted by the arbitrator in the award for the first two periods-pre reference period and interest during pendency of the arbitration proceedings. But interest has not been granted by the arbitrator in the award for the last period, C from the date of award till the date of the decree. The awardee-appellant filed an application under section 17 of the Arbitration Act, 1940 for pronouncing a judgment in terms of the award. It did not file any objection u/s. 30 of the Act to the award about denial of such interest. So o there is no scope for the executing court to· go beyond the award and grant interest for the post award period which was not granted in the award. The executing court has gone beyond the award and thus had gone beyond its jurisdiction and passed a decree which thus, becomes E a nullity. [Paras·9, 11, 13~ 14, 15 and 17) [159-C-D; 160-B,; 161-E-G; 162-8-C) Visakapatnam Municipal Corporation vs. K. Satyanarayana and Co. (1995) 2 SCC 385, relied on. F Executive Engineer (Irrigation), Balimela and Ors. vs. Abhaduta Jena and Ors. (1988) 1 SCC 418; Gujarat Water Supply and Sewerage Board vs. Unique Erectors (Gujarat) (P) Ltd. and Anr. (1989) 1 SCC 532, distinguished. G Secretary, Irrigation Department, Government of Orissa and Ors. vs. G.C. Roy (1992) 1 SCC 508, referred to. Case Law Reference: (1988) 1 sec 418 Distinguished. Para 11 H COAL LINKER v. COAL INDIA LIMITED 157 (1989) 1 sec 532 Distinguished. Para 11 A (1992) 1 sec 508 Referred to. Para 12 (1995) 2 sec 385 Relied on. Para 16 CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal No. B 1146 of 2003. ,l. From the Judgment & Order dated 8.3.2001 of the High Court at Calcutta in G.A. No. 2489 of 1996. K.V. Vishwanathan, Amit Bansal, Navin Chawla for the c Appellant. Mathai M. Paikeday, Sunil Roy for the Respondent. The Judgment of the Court was delivered by D GANGULY, J. 1. The appellant herein, a proprietary concern, was given a work order on or about 5.7.1982 by Coal India Limited (hereinafter referred to as "the respondent") for transportation of coal/coke by road to the respondent's stockyard at Kanpur and also for operation of the said E stockyard. 2. Pursuant to such work order a formal agreement was entered into between the appellant and the respondent and the said agreement contained an arbitration clause. 'As disputes F and differences arose between the parties, a reference was made to the sole arbitrator for resolving the dispute and an award dated 30.4.1993 was passed awarding an amount of Rs.51
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.