[2026:RJ-JP:11351-DB] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR D.B. Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No. 2823/2025 The Managing Director, Rajasthan State Seeds Corporation Limited, Rajasthan State Seeds Corporation Limited, Pant Krishi Bhawan, 3Rd Floor, Janpath, Jaipur (Raj.) ----Appellant Versus M/s Shree Gouri Shankar Jute Miles Limited, 16-A, Barbourme Road, 5Th Floor, Kolkata-700001 Through Its Managing Director. ----Respondent For Appellant(s) : Mr. Dinesh Yadav For Respondent(s) : Mr. Anurag Agrawal with Mr. Satish Pareek HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE MR. SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BALJINDER SINGH SANDHU Judgment 17/03/2026 1. This is an appeal filed against the order dated 08.04.2025 whereby the application filed under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (herein after referred to as ‘the Act of 1996’) was rejected by the Commercial Court No.3, Jaipur Metropolitan II and the award passed by the Arbitrator dated 24.12.2022 which directed payment of interest @ 8.5% on the delayed payment of Gunny bags supplied by the respondent. 2. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the Rajasthan State Seeds Corporation Limited had invited tenders for supply of Gunny bags and other consumables for the year 2011-12. The respondent-company was declared successful in the financial bid and 14 lakh bags were supplied. However, it was later on found [2026:RJ-JP:11351-DB] (2 of 2) [CMA-2823/2025] that the respondent-company was blacklisted company and was therefore, disqualified. In view thereto, a decision was taken not to make the payment. Later on the Arbitrator passed an award. 3. Learned counsel submits that while the amount for the bags has already been released, there was no occasion to impose interest on cost of the bags which have been received. 4. We find that the Arbitrator has granted interest @ 8.5% for the period from 2012-25.07.2018 and interest @ 6% from 26.07.2018 till payment of the amount on the basis of the documents which were placed before him. We notice that the interest amount as paid cannot be said to be illegal or unjustified in terms of the power available with the Arbitrator as per Section 31 (7)(b) of the Act of 1996. The amount so imposed cannot be objected and we concur with the order passed by the Commercial Court. 5. The appeal is accordingly dismissed. However, one month time is granted to make the payment. (BALJINDER SINGH SANDHU),J (SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA),ACTING CJ Simple Kumawat /199