Presumption Of Correctness Of Judicial Records Not Absolute And Can Be Rebutted By Direct Evidence: Kerala High Court on Married Daughter Cannot Challenge Partition After 21-Year Slumber If She Had Knowledge: Madhya Pradesh High Court Kerala High Court Orders Immediate Suspension Of Lakshadweep CJM For Allegedly Forging Witness Deposition To Convict Accused Supreme Court Bars Post-Divorce Maintenance Claims When Wife Voluntarily Waived Maintenance In Settlement Agreement Advocate Is An Officer Of Court, Not Mere Agent Of Client: Allahabad High Court Distinguishes Between Active Concealment & Statement In Ignorance, Slaps Cost On Litigants For Misleading Bench Cannot Summon Accused Mechanically On Protest Petition Without Assigning Justifiable Reasons: Andhra Pradesh High Court Increment Not A Bounty: Allahabad High Court Rules Public Holiday Cannot Delay Pay Hike For Teachers Joining Next Working Day Paying Taxes Or Utility Connections Confer No Legal Ownership Over Govt Land': Andhra Pradesh High Court Orders Demolition Of Encroachment 'Cannot Compel Public Authority To Collect Data From Private Bodies': Bombay High Court Quashes CIC Orders Directing SEBI To Procure BSE Records Under RTI Act Section 10 CPC Cannot Stay Previously Instituted Title Suit Pending Subsequent Probate Case; Inherent Powers Under Section 151 Inapplicable When Probate Dismissed: Calcutta High Court Mere Phone Calls Without Transcripts No Ground For Murder Conspiracy: Delhi High Court Clear Violation Of Section 42 NDPS Act': Gujarat High Court Holds Failure To Record Secret Info In Writing Fatal When Police Officer Had Time To Act JK High Court Quashes Criminal Case Against Cop Accused Of Threatening Advocate Over Phone Call Without Prior Sanction Under Section 197 CrPC Custody Unwarranted For Mere Formalities Once Weapon Is Recovered: Kerala High Court Grants Regular Bail In BNS Axe Attack Case Circumstances Of Crime Can Be Assessed During Trial: High Court Upholds Trial Of Minor As Adult Under JJ Act In Murder Case Statutory Deposit Under Order 21 Rule 89 CPC Is A Sine Qua Non; Litigant Cannot Stall Auction Sale By Merely Blaming Counsel: Madras High Court

Himachal High Court Warns Arbitrator Over Delays, Extends Deadline in National Highway-21 Compensation Case

11 October 2024 3:54 PM

By: sayum


Himachal Pradesh High Court, in Nand Lal vs. The Land Acquisition Collector, National Highway & Ors., addressed delays in arbitration proceedings concerning the acquisition of land for National Highway 21 in District Mandi. The court extended the mandate of the arbitrator until March 25, 2025, criticizing the arbitral process for breaches of statutory timelines under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.

The dispute arises from the acquisition of land under the National Highways Act, 1956, for the widening and maintenance of National Highway-21. The petitioner, Nand Lal, contested the compensation awarded by the Land Acquisition Collector and initiated arbitral proceedings. The arbitration related to Award No. 1/3 dated April 26, 2018, but the case faced repeated adjournments, and the arbitrator's mandate expired without concluding the proceedings.

The petitioner filed for an extension under Section 29-A of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, which sets strict timelines for concluding arbitration but allows for extensions by court order.

The core issue before the court was whether the arbitrator had violated the statutory time limits under Sections 23 and 29-A of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act. Section 29-A mandates that an arbitral award be rendered within twelve months from the completion of pleadings, with a possible six-month extension if agreed upon by the parties.

Justice Bipin Chander Negi highlighted how the arbitrator repeatedly delayed the proceedings, stating:

"The proceedings have been conducted by the learned Arbitrator by observing statutory provisions… more in their breach rather than in their observance."

The court emphasized that statutory timelines must be adhered to, adding that any further breaches could result in the termination of the arbitrator’s mandate under Section 29-A(6). Nonetheless, the court extended the timeline to avoid prejudice to the petitioner, whose compensation claim had been pending for years.

The court granted an extension for the arbitrator to conclude the proceedings by March 25, 2025. While extending the mandate, the court warned that continued delays would not be tolerated:

"If the Court finds the Arbitrator to be remiss in his duties… it shall not hesitate in invoking its powers… to terminate the mandate of the Arbitrator."

Additionally, the court referenced the 2022 Supreme Court decision in Cognizance for Extension of Limitation, which allowed for the exclusion of time periods impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic. The court applied this principle to grant additional time for the arbitration process.

In this ruling, the Himachal Pradesh High Court extended the arbitrator’s mandate while underscoring the importance of adhering to statutory timelines. The court directed the arbitrator to adhere to a strict timetable and finalize the proceedings by March 2025 to ensure the petitioner receives timely compensation.

Date of Decision: September 25, 2024

Nand Lal vs. The Land Acquisition Collector, National Highway & Ors.​.

Latest Legal News