The National Highways Authority of India v. Smt Sujatha

((((((((((((HC-KAR, NC:(2026:KHC:39207-DB( MFA(No.(5879(of(2024( ( ,,,,,,,,,, , CNR:(KAHC010483962024( ( ( (

IN(THE(HIGH(COURT(OF(KARNATAKA(AT(BENGALURU(

THDATED(THIS(THE(28 (DAY(OF(JULY,(2026(

PRESENT(

THE(HON'BLE(MRS.(JUSTICE(ANU(SIVARAMAN(

AND((

THE(HON'BLE(MR.(JUSTICE(VENKATESH(NAIK(T(

MISCELLANEOUS(FIRST(APPEAL(NO.5879(OF(2024((AA)(

(

BETWEEN:((

(

1., THE,NATIONAL,HIGHWAYS,AUTHORITY,OF,INDIA, THROUGH,ITS,PROJECT,DIRECTOR, MR.,SHIRISH,GANGADAHAR, PIU,,CHITRADURGA,

HAVING,,ITS,OFFICE,AT,PIU,, NATIONAL,,HIGHWAYS,AUTHORITY,OF,INDIA,(NHAI), NEAR,JMIT,,NH-48, CHITRADURGA-577,501,

, Digitally

2., SPECIAL,LAND,ACQUISITION,OFFICER,AND,signedtiby PAVITHR A0N COMPETENT,AUTHORITY, Location: NH-50,,SITE,OFFICE,, High0Court CHITRADURGA., of0Karnataka , …APPELLANTS, (BY,SRI.,,SAGAAR,LADDA,,ADV.,AND, SRI.,B.,SOMASEKAR,NAIDU,,ADV.), ((((((((((((HC-KAR, NC:(2026:KHC:39207-DB( MFA(No.(5879(of(2024( ( ,,,,,,,,,, , CNR:(KAHC010483962024( ( ( AND:( (

1., SMT.,SUJATHA, W/O,B.A.LINGAREDDY, AGE:,ABOUT,40,YEARS, R/O,SRE,LAYOUT,,TURUVANUR,ROAD, CHITRADURGA-577,517., ,

2., THE,DEPUTY,COMMISSIONER,AND,ARBITRATOR,, NATIONAL,HIGHWAYS,ACT,,, OFFICE,OF,THE,DEPUTY,COMMISSIONER,, CHITRADURGA,DISTRICT,,, CHITRADURGA-577,501, …RESPONDENTS, (BY,SRI.,SANGAMESH,R.,B.,ADV.,FOR,R1;, SRI.,ADITYA,VIKRAM,BHAT,,AGA,FOR,R2), , , THIS,MFA,IS,FILED,UNDER,SECTION,37(1),(C),OF,THE, ARBITRATION, AND, CONCILIATION, ACT,, 1996,, AGAINST, THE, ORDER, DATED, 05.10.2023, , PASSED, IN, A.P.NO.84/2022, ON, THE,FILE,OF,THE,PRINCIPAL,DISTRICT,AND,SESSIONS,JUDGE,, CHITRADURGA,, DISMISSING, THE, PETITION, FILED, UNDER, SECTION, 34, (2), OF, ARBITRATION, AND, CONCILIATION, ACT,,, 1996,READ,WITH,UNDER,ORDER,7,RULE,1,OF,CPC., , , THIS,APPEAL,,COMING,ON,FOR,ADMISSION,,THIS,DAY,, JUDGMENT,WAS,DELIVERED,THEREIN,AS,UNDER:, CORAM:, HON'BLE,MRS.,JUSTICE,ANU,SIVARAMAN, and,, HON'BLE,MR.,JUSTICE,VENKATESH,NAIK,T, ,

ORAL JUDGMENT

(PER: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN)

This appeal arises from the judgment dated 05.10.2023 passed by the Principal District and Sessions Judge, at Chitradurga in A.P.No.84/2022, in exercise of the powers under the provisions of National Highways Authority Act, 1956 ("NH Act for short).

¶2We have heard the learned counsel appearing on either side.

¶3It is submitted that the learned counsel appearing for the respondents that the respondents owned land in Survey No.57/3 of the Pillekerenahally Village, Chitradurga Taluk which was acquired for the purpose of widening of NH-13. It is stated that the compensation was fixed at the rate of Rs.3,234.65/- per sq.mtrs by the Competent Authority. Aggrieved by the order passed by the Competent Authority, the respondents had filed application under Section 3G(5) of the NH Act before the learned Arbitrator of Chitradurga District claiming enhancement of compensation. The said application was filed in the year

2016. After conducting an enquiry, the learned Arbitrator passed an Arbitral Award dated 10.03.2022, enhancing the compensation to Rs.7,263/- per sq. mtr.

¶4It is submitted by the learned counsel appearing for the appellants that the award so passed is subject to infirmities. It is contended that, the arbitration was initiated by filing of application under Section 3G(5) of the NH Act filed in the year 2016. The learned Arbitrator entered on reference and the parties had placed their pleadings on record and led evidence. However, award was passed only on 10.03.2022, much beyond the time as provided under Section 29A of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (for short "Arbitration Act").

¶5It is submitted, relying on the order of the Apex Court in Rattan Chand & Anr v. National Highways Authority of India and Anr in Special Leave to Appeal(C) No(S).21144/2023 dated 06.10.2023, that in case, the award is not passed in compliance with the time limit as provided under Section 29A of the Arbitration Act, the matter

has to be remanded to the learned Arbitrator to consider the same afresh in accordance with law and pass a fresh award.

¶6Further, it is contended that the acquisition in question was one initiated in the year 2012 and that the application of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (for short "2013, Act") for the purpose of determining the compensation is a patent illegality. It is submitted that the matter therefore requires to be remanded to the learned Arbitrator for passing a fresh award in accordance with law.

¶7The learned counsel appearing for the respondents, on the other hand, contended that the question of applicability of the provisions of the 2013 Act is also a matter of fact in favour of the respondents covered by the decision of the learned Single Judge of this Court in MFA No.2859/2024 (AA). It is submitted that since the majority of the compensation had not been paid or deposited before 01.01.2015, the said ground is not available to the appellants to challenge the award.

¶8Having considered the contentions advanced, we notice that it is not in dispute between the parties that the application under Section 3G(5) of NH Act, had been filed in the year 2016. It is also not in dispute that the pleadings were completed well in advance, but the Arbitral Award was passed only on 10.03.2022. Even taking note of the time as provided under Section 29A(3) of the Arbitration Act where the parties could extend the period of one year for a further period of six months, on consent, the said period had also expired by the time the Arbitral Award has been passed.

¶9In the above view of the matter, we are of the opinion that the matter requires to be remanded to the Arbitrator for a fresh consideration in accordance with law and for passing of an award strictly in compliance with the provisions of Section 29A of the Arbitration Act as well.

¶10In the result:-

(i) The Miscellaneous First Appeal is allowed.

(ii) The award dated 10.03.2022 passed by the Arbitrator and Deputy Commissioner, Chitradurga, is set aside.

(iii) The matter is remanded to the Arbitrator and Deputy Commissioner, Chitradurga for consideration and for passing of a fresh award.

(iv) The parties are permitted to adduce additional evidence, if any, before the learned Arbitrator.

(v) The Arbitrator shall endeavour to hear the parties and complete the proceedings as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of six months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

(vi) In the process, all other questions with regard to fixing of compensation and the applicability of the 2013 Act are left open to be decided by the Arbitrator in accordance with law.

¶11Further, the learned counsel appearing for the appellant submits that 50% of the amount deposited by the

appellants at the time of admission of the appeal had been permitted to be withdrawn by the respondents herein.

¶12It is therefore made clear that the said withdrawal of the compensation will be noticed by the learned Arbitrator and shall be subject to outcome of the Arbitral proceedings before the learned Arbitrator.

¶13The further amount in deposit before this Court is permitted to be withdrawn by the appellants. All pending interlocutory applications shall stand disposed of.

Sd/- (ANU SIVARAMAN) JUDGE

Sd/- (VENKATESH NAIK T) JUDGE

RAK List No.: 3 Sl No.: 2