HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE A. GOPAL REDDY AND HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G.V.SEETHAPATHY C.R.P.No.1770 OF 2010 Dated: 27-04-2010 Between: M/s.Rane Elastomer Processors Rep. by GPA Holder Sandeep Karwa Agarwal, Industrial Estate, 26/27, Dahisa (East), Mumbai. …Petitioner. AND The Board of Trustees of Port of Visakhapatnam, rep. by its Deputy Secretary and Alternate Attorney. Respondent. This Court made the following: HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE A. GOPAL REDDY AND HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G.V.SEETHAPATHY C.R.P.No.1770 of 2010 ORDER: (Per Hon’ble Sri Justice A.Gopal Reddy) This revision under Article 227 of Constitution of India is directed to revise the orders of the VI Additional District Judge, Visakhapatnam, dated 31.3.2009 made in E.P.No.23 of 2008 in A.O.P.No.864 of 2002. For due execution of the award passed by the Arbitrator including the interest from the date of the award, petitioner herein filed E.P.No.23 of 2008 in A.O.P.No.864 of 2002 on the file of VI Additional District Judge, Visakhapatnam. The learned Additional District Judge by the impugned order rejected the contention of the petitioner-decree holder that it is not entitled to interest after the date of the award. Questioning the same, the present revision is filed. Learned counsel for the petitioner strenuously contended that under Section 31(7)(b) of Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (for short ‘the Act’), when the Arbitrator awarded certain amount, unless and otherwise specifically directed, the same will carry interest at the rate of 18% per annum from the date of the award to the date of its payment. In the present case, since the Arbitrator in his award only ordered that no orders as to interest after the date of award, the petitioner is entitled to interest from the date of the award, and therefore, the lower Court is not justified in rejecting the claim for the interest from the date of award till the date of realization. It is not disputed that the Arbitrator by his award, dated 29.5.2002 allowed certain claims of the petitioner and on claim No.7, it was held in paragraph 8.1 of the Award as under: “8.1 I have already awarded interest on the award sum up to 27.8.2001. As explained in para 6 above, the undersigned is not prohibited from awarding of interest. Accordingly, I award that the Respondents pay to Claimants “Pendente Lite” simple interest on the award sum viz. Rs.72,76,000/- @ 15% p.a. from 28.8.2001 to the date of this award viz. 29.5.2002. The amount of interest so awarded is Rs.8,19,298/-. No orders as to interest after the date of award.” The sentence ‘No orders as to interest after the date of award’ implies that the learned Arbitrator was not inclined to award interest on the amounts due from the date of award till its realization. Section 31(7-B) of the Act on which reliance is placed by the learned counsel for the petitioner reads as under: “31(7)(b) A sum directed to be paid by an arbitral award shall unless the award otherwise directs carry interest at the rate of eighteen per centum per annum from the date of the award to the date of payment.” It is fairly well settled that the Arbitrator has power to award interest at all the stages viz., (i) pre-reference stage; (ii) pendente lite; and (iv) post-award period. The learned Arbitrator was conscious of the fact that the petitioner herein is entitled to interest only the award amount up to the date of award and therefore, with due application of mind, he has not awarded any amount towards future interest. In the award passed on 29.5.2002, the Arbitrator has specifically stated that there is no order as to interest for the future. Section 35 of the Act deals with the finality of the Arbitral award, which substantially corresponds to Rule 7 of Schedule-I to the Act of 1940; (2) Section 58(1) of English Arbitration Act, 1996 and (3) Article 31(1) of the UNCITRAL Model Law, subject to Chapter-VII and the same shall be binding on the parties thereto and the persons claiming under them respectively. Where the time for making an application under Section 34 of the Act has expired or such application having been made has been refused, the award shall be enforced under the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 in the same manner as if it were a decree of the Court under Section 36 of the Act. Under Section 33 of the Act, within 30 days from the date of receipt of arbitral award, unless another period of time has been agreed upon by the parties; (a) a party with notice to the other party may request the arbitral tribunal to correct any computation errors any clerical or typographical errors or any other errors of a similar nature occurring in the award; (b) if so agreed by the parties a party with notice to the other party may request the arbitral tribunal to give an interpretation of a specific point or part of the award. Under the Act, power has been specifically given to the arbitral tribunal to award interest from the date on which cause of action arose till the date of payment as provided in sub-section (7) and no decree is required to be passed in terms of the award as award itself is made executable as a decree of the Court. Under the Act, it is no longer open for the Court to make order for interest beyond the date of award. If the petitioner herein requires any interpretation to be given by the Arbitrator with regard to the future interest from the date of award till realization, it should have moved the arbitral tribunal under Section 33 of the Act within 30 days from the date of submission of the arbitral award. Having not chosen to avail the said remedy, the petitioner is not entitled to claim interest from the date of the award, which was specifically denied by the Arbitrator with the aid of Section 31(7)(b) of the Act, the impugned order passed by the lower Court rejecting the said claim does not suffer from any illegality warranting interference by this Court. The revision fails and the same is accordingly dismissed. No order as to costs. ________________ A. GOPAL REDDY, J. __________________ APRIL 27, 2010 G.V. SEETHAPATHY, J. Tsr.