JUDGMENT : Moushumi Bhattacharya, J. 1. The award-holder has filed this application in its execution proceeding pertaining to an Award dated 30th September, 2008. By the impugned Award, the award-debtor was held liable for a sum of Rs.3,87,73,200/- on account of the award-holder’s loss of profit. The learned Arbitrator also awarded costs assessed at Rs.4 lakhs in favour of the award-holder. The Award has now fructified into a decree of the Court and the award-holder says that the award-debtor should be directed to pay interest on the Award at 18% per annum till the date of payment. 2. Learned counsel appearing for the award-holder submits that the rate of interest would be 18% taking into account the position before the Amendment of 2016 which came into effect from 23.10.2015. Counsel also places paragraph 15.12 of the Award to say that the interest at 18% would start accruing if the award-debtor failed to pay the awarded sum within a reasonable period. Counsel submits that the award-holder construed this reasonable period from 1st February, 2009 and accordingly seeks interest at 18% on the awarded amount from 1st February, 2009. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the award-debtor submits that the rate of interest would be governed by Section 31(7)(b) of The Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 since the Award was made pre-amendment. 4. The only question which falls for consideration is the rate of interest which the award-holder is entitled to in terms of the Amendment of 2016 brought into effect from 23.10.2015, i.e., whether the interest rate should be 18% or 2% higher than the rate of interest prevalent on the date of the Award which is to be paid from the date of the Award to the date of payment. 5. The admitted dates, which are relevant to this question, are as follows : The Award was delivered on 30th September, 2008. The award-debtor sought for setting aside of the Award which resulted in a judgment of the learned Single Judge of 12th December, 2018 setting aside part of the Award. Both the award-debtor as well as the award-holder challenged the said judgment and the Divison Bench by a judgment dated 17th August, 2019 restored the Award to its original form and quantum. The Supreme Court dismissed the award-debtor’s Special Leave Petition on 10th February, 2020. Both the award-debtor as well as the award-holder challenged the said judgment and the Divison Bench by a judgment dated 17th August, 2019 restored the Award to its original form and quantum. The Supreme Court dismissed the award-debtor’s Special Leave Petition on 10th February, 2020. The award-debtor thereafter furnished 8 cheques covering the amount of Rs.3,89,04,600/-towards the principal amount and costs of Rs.4 lakhs on 6th August, 2021 but did not pay the interest component which the petitioner/award-holder now demands. 6. The award-holder in the meantime had earlier filed two execution applications in 2010 and 2017 which were withdrawn and the present execution proceedings filed on 20th July, 2021. 7. From the brief sequence of events, it is evident that the Award was made before the Amendments to Section 31(7)(b) were brought into effect on and from 23.10.2015. The pre-amendment position was that a sum directed to be paid by an arbitral tribunal shall, unless the Award otherwise directs, carry interest at the rate of 18% per annum from the date of the Award to the date of payment. 8. On and from 23.10.2015 i.e., post-amendment, Section 31(7)(b) was transformed to require the Award, unless directed otherwise, to carry interest at the rate of 2% higher than the current rate of interest prevalent on the date of the Award, from the date of the Award to the date of payment. 9. Since the Award would be governed by the pre-amendment position, the Award would normally have attracted the interest rate at 18% per annum. However, the last paragraph of the Award read with paragraph 15.12 makes it clear that the Arbitrator thought it fit only to award the principal amount of approximately of Rs.3.87 crores on account of loss of profit without the interest component of 18% which was claimed by the award-holder. Paragraph 15.12 of the Award records that the Arbitrator agreed with the respondent that the respondent should not be liable for payment of the 18% interest component for loss of profit. Paragraph 15.12 goes to record the following: “However, this would start accruing if the amount given as award is not paid to claimant within a reasonable period”. 10. Paragraph 15.12 of the Award records that the Arbitrator agreed with the respondent that the respondent should not be liable for payment of the 18% interest component for loss of profit. Paragraph 15.12 goes to record the following: “However, this would start accruing if the amount given as award is not paid to claimant within a reasonable period”. 10. It is not clear from paragraph 15.12 what the Arbitrator meant by ‘this’ since the paragraph does not clarify whether the interest at 18% would be payable to the award-holder if the principal sum was not paid within a reasonable period of time. Paragraph 15.12 read with the last paragraph of the Award however makes it absolutely clear that the Arbitrator deemed it fit not to award interest at 18% for the loss of profit claimed by the award-holder. 11. Since the interest claimed at 18% was not awarded to the award-holder, this Court cannot hold that the award-debtor can now claim that interest and at the rate of 18% at the time of execution. This view would be reinforced by the fact that the execution proceedings were filed on 20.07.2021 that is after the amendment to Section 31(7)(b) was introduced on and from 23.10.2015. In essence, since the Award is silent or rather refused to pass any Award on interest, the vacuum thereto would be filled up by the amended Section 31(7)(b) which was already in place when the execution application was filed in 2021. This was also the view taken by the Supreme Court in Hindustan Construction Company Limited vs. Union of India (2020) 17 SCC 324 . 12. The decisions relied on by the learned counsel appearing for the award-holder do not address the point which is before the Court that is whether the pre-amendment position on interest can be reinstated after the 2016 amendment to Section 31(7)(b), particularly, where the arbitral tribunal refused to grant interest on the Award. Board of Control For Cricket In India vs. Kochi Cricket Private Limited [ (2018) 6 SCC 287 ] held that the Amendment Act, 2016 would have prospective effect. Morgan Securities and Credits Private Limited vs. Videocon Industries Limited [ (2023) 1 SCC 602 held that the Arbitrator has full discretion in the matter of post-award interest. Board of Control For Cricket In India vs. Kochi Cricket Private Limited [ (2018) 6 SCC 287 ] held that the Amendment Act, 2016 would have prospective effect. Morgan Securities and Credits Private Limited vs. Videocon Industries Limited [ (2023) 1 SCC 602 held that the Arbitrator has full discretion in the matter of post-award interest. Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited vs. Governor, State of Orissa [ (2015) 2 SCC 189 ] described the award and the interest as a “sum” where the individual components lose their identities. Ssangyong Engineering and Construction Company Limited vs. National Highways Authority of India (NHAI) [ (2019) 15 SCC 131 was more on patent illegality appearing on the face of the award with reference to the fundamental policy of Indian Law. 13. On the other hand, Hindustan Construction clarifies the position which is before this Court that is where the award is pre-amendment and the execution for that award is post-amendment. 14. In view of the above reasons, the Court is persuaded to hold that the petitioner is certainly entitled to its claim for interest on the awarded amount but that the rate of interest would be under the amended Section 31(7)(b) which contemplates the rate of interest as being 2% higher than the current rate of interest prevalent from the date of the award to the date of the payment. 15. Since the Award is of 2008 and the principal amount was paid by the award-debtor only in 2021, the award-debtor shall pay interest at the rate of 2% higher than the prevalent rate on the date of the Award, i.e., 30th September, 2008 till the date of payment. The SBI rates as on 12th August, 2008 was 13.75%. Hence, the award-debtor shall pay interest of 15.75% on the awarded amount being Rs.3,89,04,600/- from 30.9.2008 till the date of payment. The amount shall be paid by 7th March, 2024 by way of banker’s cheque to the award-holder’s designated bank account particulars of which shall be furnished to the award-debtor by 4:30 pm today. 16. The EC will remain pending till the award-debtor complies with this order. 17. List the EC on 12th March, 2024. Urgent photostat certified copies of this judgment, if applied for, be supplied to the respective parties upon fulfillment of requisite formalities.