The court upheld the applicability of the RFCTLARR Act, 2013 to compensation determinations under the National Highways Act, affirming the Arbitrator's decision to enhance compensation based on residential land classification.

JUDGMENT :

H.P. Sandesh, J.

This miscellaneous first appeal is filed challenging the order dated 06.01.2024 passed in A.P.No.89/2022 by the I Additional District and Sessions Judge, Mangaluru and consequently set aside the arbitral award passed in No.C.DIS.ARB(2). NH.LAQ.CR – 127/2017-18 DATED 19.04.2022 passed by respondent No.2 for enhancing the compensation at the rate of Rs.1,28,800/- per cent.

2. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the respective parties.

3. The factual matrix of the case is that a notification came to be issued for acquiring the land for the purpose of widening of National Highway No.66 at Kotekar village under Section 3A(1) of the National Highways Act (for short ‘NH Act’) on 08.02.2010 and the Special Land Acquisition Officer passed the award determining the compensation in respect of the land bearing Sy.No.24/5B measuring 546.34 square meters residential converted land situated in Kotekar village, Mangaluru taluk for which compensation was determined at Rs.1,00,000/-per cent considering the same as dry land. The respondent herein filed a petition under Section 3G(5) of the NH Act to the Deputy Commissioner, D.K., Mangaluru being aggrieved by the determination of compensation of Rs.1,00,000/- per cent. Respondent No.2 i.e., the Arbitrator-cum-Deputy Commissioner of D.K., Mangaluru, vide order dated 19.04.2022, determined the compensation as Rs.1,28,800/- per cent considering the land as residential in nature with 9% interest as applicable under Section 3H(5) of the NH Act and with all benefits admissible under the provisions of RFCTLARR Act, 2013. The appellant herein has filed the Arbitration Petition before the I Additional District and Sessions Judge, Mangaluru challenging the arbitral award passed by respondent No.3 and the District and Sessions Judge, dismissed the said petition vide order dated 06.01.2024. Being aggrieved by the said order, the present appeal is filed before this Court.

4. The learned counsel for the appellant would vehemently contend that inspite of the award has been passed considering the material available on record, Arbitrator has committed an error in enhancing the compensation from Rs.1,00,000/- per cent to Rs.1,28,800/- per cent holding that the land acquired has good potential for future development and the said approach is erroneous. It is also contend that the Arbitrator under the provisions of Arbitration and Conciliation Act is required to exercise the powers as conferred under Section 3G(7) of the NH Act, 1956 and extracted the said provisions. It is also contend that the competent authority by considering the relevant material passed the well reasoned award on 17.08.2011 which does not call for interference. The District Judge has erred in not taking note of the said provision. The Arbitrator has also misinterpreting the judgment passed by the Apex Court and the ordinance/notification issued by the Government of India No.S.O.2368(E) dated 28.08.2015 by which the provisions of RFCTLARR Act, 2013 are made applicable with effect from 01.01.2015 as such the Arbitrator has passed the impugned award enhancing the compensation by making the provisions of said Act retrospectively to the land acquired without jurisdiction and authority of law.

5. The counsel also would vehemently contend that the land was acquired by the SLAO and CA as per notification dated 08.02.2010 which was published under Section 3A of the NH Act and award was passed on 17.08.2011 by following the provisions of the NH Act. However, the Arbitrator passed an impugned award enhancing compensation by directing the respondent to recalculate the compensation under the provisions of RFCTLARR Act, 2013 which came into force with effect from 01.01.2015 and the Government of India issued notification that the provisions of Schedule – I, II and III of RFCTLARR Act are made applicable with effect from 01.01.2015 and passed the impugned order directing to recalculate the compensation and pay all the admissible benef