NITYANANDA SAMANTARAY Vs. STATE OF ORISSA AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner's prayer for grant of interest in terms of Sec. 29 of the Arbitration Act, 1940 (in short, the 'Act') having been rejected by the learned Subordinate Judge, Bhubaneswar, this court has been moved for interference.

(2.) Background facts necessary for disposal of the application are as follows :

(3.) In support of the application Mr. S.K. Sanganeria submitted that though grant of interest is discretionary, consideration must be made judiciously with reasons. Strong reliance is placed on a decision of this court in Nityananda Samantaray Vs. State of Orissa, AIR 1987 Ori. 132 . It is stated that the petitioner was also the claimant-petitioner in the said reported case, and the fact situation is identical. Learned counsel for State on the other hand submitted that in the earlier case on reason was indicated. But in the case at hand reasons have been indicated by the learned Subordinate Judge which cannot be termed to be perverse or unreasonable, and therefore, while exercising revisional jurisdiction interference is not called for.