Sale Deeds Must Be Interpreted Literally When the Language is Clear and Unambiguous: Supreme Court    |     Non-Signatory Can Be Bound by Arbitration Clause Based on Conduct and Involvement: Supreme Court    |     Right to Passport is a Fundamental Right, Denial Without Justification Violates Article 21: Allahabad High Court    |     Insurance Company's Liability Remains Despite Policy Cancellation Due to Dishonored Cheque: Calcutta High Court    |     Deductions Under Sections 36(1)(vii) and 36(1)(viia) of the Income Tax Act Are Independent and Cannot Be Curtailed: Bombay High Court    |     Diary Entries Cannot Alone Implicate the Accused Without Corroborative Evidence: Supreme Court Upholds Discharge of Accused in Corruption Case    |     MACT | Fraud Vitiates All Judicial Acts, Even Without Specific Review Powers: Rajasthan High Court    |     Right of Private Defense Cannot Be Weighed in Golden Scales: Madhya Pradesh High Court Acquits Appellant in Culpable Homicide Case    |     If Two Reasonable Conclusions Are Possible, Acquittal Should Not Be Disturbed: Supreme Court    |     Kalelkar Award Explicitly Provides Holiday Benefits for Temporary Employees, Not Subject to Government Circulars: Supreme Court Upholds Holiday and Overtime Pay    |     NDPS | Homogeneous Mixing of Bulk Drugs Essential for Valid Sampling Under NDPS Act: Punjab & Haryana High Court    |     Pre-Arrest Bail Not a Right but an Exception: Himachal High Court Denied Bail In Dowry Death Case"    |     POCSO | Scholar Register Is Sufficient to Determine Victim’s Age in POCSO Cases: Madhya Pradesh High Court    |     Abuse of Official Position in Appointments: Prima Facie Case for Criminal Misconduct: Delhi High Court Upholds Framing of Charges Against Swati Maliwal in DCW Corruption Case    |     Service Law | Similarly Situated Employees Cannot Be Denied Equal Treatment: PH High Court Orders Regularization    |     Presumption of Innocence Remains Supreme Unless Clearly Overturned: PH High Court Affirming Acquittal    |     Any Physical Liaison with A Girl Of Less Than Eighteen Years Is A Strict Offense.: Patna High Court Reiterates Strict Stance On Sexual Offences Against Minors    |     Orissa High Court Rules Res Judicata Inapplicable When Multiple Appeals Arise from Same Judgment    |     Mandatory Section 80 Notice Cannot Be Bypassed Lightly:  Jammu & Kashmir High Court Returns Plaint for Non-Compliance    |     Bombay High Court Denies Permanent Lecturer Appointment for Failing to Meet UGC Eligibility Criteria at Time of Appointment    |     Deferred Cross-Examination Gave Time for Witness Tampering, Undermining Fair Trial: Allahabad High Court    |     Dowry Death | Presumption Under Section 113-B Not Applicable as No Proof of Cruelty Soon Before Death : Supreme Court    |     Gift Deed Voided as Son Fails to Care for Elderly Mother, Karnataka High Court Asserts ‘Implied Duty’ in Property Transfers    |     Denial of a legible 164 statement is a denial of a fair trial guaranteed by the Constitution of India: Kerala High Court    |     Safety Shoes Used as Weapon Meets Mens Rea Requirement for Murder: Rajasthan HC on Bail Denial    |     Fraud on the Courts Cannot Be Tolerated: Supreme Court Ordered CBI Investigation Against Advocate    |     Land Acquisition | Jaiprakash Associates Ltd. (JAL) Liable for Compensation under Supplementary Award, Not Ultra-Tech Cement Ltd.: Supreme Court    |     Non-Mentioning of Bail Orders in Detention Reflects Clear Non-Application of Mind: J&K High Court Quashes Preventive Detention Order    |     Conviction Under Arms Act and Criminal Conspiracy Quashed Due to Non-Seizure of Key Evidence and Failure to Prove Ownership of Box: Jharkhand High Court    |     Prima Facie Proof of Valid Marriage Required Before Awarding Maintenance Under Section 125 Cr.P.C: Calcutta High Court Sets Aside Interim Maintenance Order    |    

Arbitrator’s Findings on Possession, Construction, Damages, and Limitation Reasonable and Based on Evidence: No Interference: Delhi High Court in Land Possession Dispute

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


The Delhi High Court upheld an arbitration award in a complex land possession case, finding no merit in the petition challenging the arbitrator’s decisions under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. The judgement was in context of a dispute over land possession following the abandonment of a multi-storeyed group housing project.

 

The court reaffirmed the arbitrator’s findings on possession, construction, damages, and the application of Section 14 of the Limitation Act as reasonable and based on evidence. The petitioners’ arguments regarding natural justice, limitation, damages, interest, costs, and counter-claims were found not sustainable, thereby upholding the arbitration award.

The petitioners and respondents, both successors in interest of the original parties, were embroiled in a dispute over land in Jamia Nagar, Okhla, following the alleged abandonment of a housing project. The key issue was whether the arbitration award directing the return of the land and payment for dismantled constructions was enforceable.

Section 14 of the Limitation Act: The court agreed with the arbitrator’s view that the respondents were diligently pursuing legal remedies from 1999 to 2019, making them eligible for the benefit of Section 14. This finding was not arbitrary or capricious and based on substantial evidence.

Principles of Natural Justice: The court found no violation of natural justice principles. The petitioners had ample opportunity to address the issues, including those related to Section 14 of the Limitation Act, in the arbitration proceedings.

Damages and Compensation: The court upheld the arbitrator’s discretion in assessing damages for dismantled constructions, despite the lack of direct evidence. The compensation was deemed reasonable and justified.

Rejection of Counter-Claim: The court agreed with the arbitrator’s rejection of the petitioner’s counter-claim for lack of sufficient evidence demonstrating how the litigation impacted the project development.

Decision: The petition challenging the arbitration award was dismissed, and the execution petition was allowed. The judgment-debtors were directed to hand over possession of the disputed land along with the awarded amount and interest within the specified time.

 Date of Decision: April 5th, 2024

MOHD. AMIN (DECEASED) THROUGH LRS & ORS. Vs. MOHD. IQBAL (DECEASED) THROUGH LRS & ORS.

Similar News