Summary
- A critical analysis explores whether interest on an arbitral award ceases when the debtor deposits the amount in a Section 34 court under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.
- The article highlights conflicting views from the Bombay High Court's P.J. Rathod case and the Delhi High Court's Ramacivil India case regarding the necessity of deposit location for interest cessation.
- It argues that the Supreme Court's precedent supports that as long as the award-holder can withdraw the deposited amount unconditionally, the court of deposit is irrelevant.
- This interpretation could significantly impact award debtors, preventing them from facing excessive interest liabilities during challenges to arbitral awards.
Join the discussion ā sign up to comment, upvote, and save articles.