Without Partition By Metes And Bounds, Co-Sharer Cannot Seek Recovery Of Possession: Supreme Court Clarifies Limits Of Order VII Rule 7 CPC Supreme Court Holds Plaintiff Entitled To Declaration Of Title Over Undivided Half Share Despite Claiming Entire Property Under Gift Deed Supreme Court Reaffirms Legality Of Remainder Of Natural Life Sentences Without Remission, Dismisses Batch Of Writ Petitions 'State Cannot Take Advantage Of Its Own Wrong': Supreme Court Holds Promotees Entitled To Count Ad Hoc Service For Seniority If Within Quota 'Elevators Are Common Carriers, Entail Heightened Duty of Care': Supreme Court Upholds NCDRC Order Holding OTIS Principally Liable For Death Due To Malfunctioning Lift Supreme Court Dismisses Compensation Claim Under Motor Vehicles Act, Holds Reach Stacker Operating in Custom-Bonded ICD Area Is Not a "Motor Vehicle" Missing ACRs Due To Illegal Termination Cannot Block Higher Judicial Pay Scales: Supreme Court Grants Relief To Rajasthan Judicial Officer Subsequent Suit Generally Transferable To Court Where Earlier Suit On Same Subject Matter Is Pending: Allahabad High Court Successive Anticipatory Bail Maintainable Under BNSS If Fact Situation Changes Or Previous Findings Become Obsolete: Andhra Pradesh High Court Tenant's "Deemed Purchaser" Right Defeated By Retrospective Notification Under Section 88(1)(b) Of Tenancy Act: Bombay High Court Buyer Not Entitled To Refund Of Earnest Money Once Sale Deed Is Duly Executed Under The Agreement: Calcutta High Court Contradictory Pleas Vitiate Defence; Drawer Liable Even If Signed Blank Cheque Was Handed Over: Delhi High Court Working Mother's Relocation To Another City Not A Ground To Completely Deny Overnight Custody To Father: Karnataka High Court Civil Courts Barred From Granting Injunctions Against SARFAESI Actions Even If Partition Suit Is Maintainable: Kerala High Court S.147 NI Act Is A Special Law, Overrides S.320 CrPC; Offence Can Be Compounded At Any Stage Even After Dismissal Of Appeal: Madras High Court Appellate Court Can Allow Additional Evidence To Ensure Fair Adjudication Even If Not Produced In Trial: Madhya Pradesh High Court Police Can Freeze Bank Accounts Under Section 106 BNSS Upon Suspicion Of 'Proceeds Of Crime': Punjab & Haryana 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