\n
\u201cNo claim for interest or damage will be entertained <\/span>or be payable<\/span><\/u>\u00a0by the corporation in respect of any amount or balance which may be lying with the corporation owing to any dispute, difference or misunderstanding between the parties <\/span>or<\/span><\/u>\u00a0in respect of any delay or omission on the part of the Engineer in charge in making intermediate or final payments <\/span>or in any other respect whatsoever<\/span><\/u>.\u201d<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\n\n
13.\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 The Court emphasized on the change in the nature of authority to grant interest under the Arbitration Act, 1940 and the Arbitration Act, 1996, and exhaustively discussed the previous judgments in this regard. Additionally, the Court expressly noted that the <\/span>Port of Calcutta<\/span><\/em>\u00a0judgment had been given under the Arbitration Act, 1940, after which, the position of law underwent a change, as clarified in the Sayeed Ahmed judgment.<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\n\n
14.\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 When faced with the question regarding the correctness of <\/span>Sayeed Ahmed<\/span><\/em>\u00a0in view of the three-judge bench decision in <\/span>Harish Chandra<\/span><\/em>
![\"\"](\"https:\/\/www.thearbitrationworkshop.com\/post\/contractual-bars-to-pre-award-interest\")
<\/wow-image><\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n