IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY
Rohit B. Deo, J.
Secretary To The Govt. - Appellant
Versus
Additional Commissioner - Respondent
Arbitration Appeal 34 of 2019, Arbitration Appeal 26 of 2019
Decided On : 12-08-2022
ARBITRATION - ARBITRATION AND CONCILIATION ACT, 1996; LAND ACQUISITION ACT, 2013; NATIONAL HIGHWAYS ACT, 1956 - Sections 34, 24, 28 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996; Sections 23(1-A), 23(2) of the Land Acquisition Act; Section 3-G of the National Highways Act - The court discussed the provisions of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, particularly Section 34, which allows for setting aside an arbitral award under specific circumstances, including contravention of public policy and principles of natural justice. The court found that the arbitrator's reliance on documents introduced after the hearing compromised the integrity of the proceedings, leading to a breach of mandatory provisions and fundamental policy of Indian law. The court also examined the applicability of Sections 23(1-A) and 23(2) of the Land Acquisition Act and Section 3-G of the National Highways Act, which pertain to compensation for land acquisition, ultimately influencing the decision to set aside the award.
Fact of the Case:
The case involves the acquisition of land owned by Mr. Sarjuprasad Sangamalal Gupta for the widening of a national highway. The claimant was dissatisfied with the compensation awarded by the competent authority and sought a higher amount through arbitration. The arbitrator awarded a significantly higher compensation, which was challenged by the National Highways Authority of India (NHAI) under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the arbitrator acted improperly by accepting evidence after the conclusion of the hearing, which violated the principles of natural justice and the mandatory provisions of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act. The court concluded that the award was vitiated by patent illegality and was in conflict with public policy.
Issues: (i) Whether the arbitral award was liable to be set aside under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996? (ii) Whether the court could invoke Section 34(4) to allow the arbitral tribunal to resume proceedings to eliminate grounds for setting aside the award?
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the introduction of crucial evidence after the hearing compromised the integrity of the arbitration process, leading to a breach of natural justice and mandatory provisions of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act. The court emphasized that the award was in conflict with the fundamental policy of Indian law and basic notions of morality and justice.
Final Decision: The court set aside the judgment of the Principal District Judge and the arbitral award, allowing the parties to seek appropriate remedies as per law.
JUDGMENT/ORDER
1. These appeals emanate from the judgment dtd. 5/4/2019, rendered by the Principal District Judge, Nagpur ("PDJ") in Civil Miscellaneous Application 688/2015, whereby the application preferred by the Government of India ("GOI") and the National Highways Authority of India ("NHAI"), under sec. 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 ("Act of 1996"), assailing the Award dtd. 20/5/2015, rendered by the Arbitrator in Arbitration Case 38/2011-12, is rejected, and further and additional relief is granted to the claimant Mr. Sarjuprasad Sangamalal Gupta ("Claimant") by modifying the Award.
2. The operative part of the judgment dtd. 5/4/2019 in Civil Miscellaneous Application 688/2015, reads thus:
<WXY>[1] The application is rejected with no order as to costs.
[2] The award is thus not set aside as prayed for by the applicants, but it is modified as under:
[i] The applicants are directed to pay the nonapplicant No. 3 the amount granted to him by the Arbitrator's award and in addition to it, 30% of the amount of the award as solatium as per the Sec. 23(2) of the Land Acquisition Act after deducting the 10% of the amount granted for the loss of easements right as per Sec. 3-G of the Highways Act.
[ii] The applicants shall pay amount calculated at the rate of 12% on the amount of compensation (market value) of the property acquired from the date of notification to the date of order of the competent authority for acquisition of land for National Highway as per Sec. 23(1-A) of the Land Acquisition Act.
[iii] The applicants shall pay interest at the rate of 9% on the amount payable under clauses 2[i] and 2[ii] from the date of notification under Sec. 3(d) of the Highways Act till the date of payment of enhanced compensation.
[iv] The amount already paid to the non- applicant No. 3 shall be deducted from the said payable amount.</WXY>
3. Arbitration Appeal 34/2019 is preferred by the GOI and the NHAI being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the judgment rendered by the learned PDJ in entirety while Arbitration Appeal 26/2019 is preferred by the claimant, who is dissatisfied with the judgment rendered by the learned PDJ to the limited extent the claimant is denied additional compensation @ 10% per annum and further to the extent the provisions of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 ("Act of 2013") are not invoked.
4. Factual matrix:
4.1 Land admeasuring 0.28 H.R. which is part and portion of land assigned Survey 10/1, situated in village Panjari (Buz.), District Nagpur admeasuring 0.87 H.R. which was owned by the claimant is acquired under the provisions of the National Highways Act, 1956 ("NHAI Act") for widening, maintenance, management and operation of Sec. of NH-7 of the Nagpur - Hyderabad National Highway ("NH-7") from K.M. 14.585 to K.M. 18.93.
4.2 Respondent 2 - as the competent authority, rendered award dtd. 6/8/2011 awarding compensation of Rs.8, 14, 000.00 (Rupees Eight Lac Fourteen Thousand) to the claimant for the land acquired.
4.3 Dissatisfied with the quantum of compensation awarded by the competent authority, the claimant preferred an application under Sec. 3-G(5) of the NHAI Act for determination of compensation amount by the arbitrator (Arbitration Case 38/11-12).
4.4 Respondent 1 - arbitrator rendered award dtd. 20/5/2015, the operative part of which award reads thus:
<WXY>i) The application is partly allowed.
ii) The non-applicants are directed to pay the applicant an amount of Rs.85, 55, 800.00 as compensation for the acquired land of 2200 Sq.Mtrs., less the amount of Rs.8, 14, 000.00 already granted/received by the applicant.
iii) The non-applicants are also directed to pay to the applicant an additional amount of 10% of the total compensation amount for the loss of easement rights as per Sec. 3G(2) of the National Highways Act, 1956, if not already paid.
iv) The non-applicants are further directed to pay the applicant an interest @9% p.a.
I-Pay Clearing Services Private Limited vs. Icici Bank Limited
Kinnari Mullick and Another vs. Ghanshyam Das Damani
The Court can partially set aside an arbitral Award and has limited scope of interference under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. The Court cannot modify an Award but can set ....
Point of Law : Once the time-limit or extended time-limit for challenging the arbitral award expires, the period for enforcing the award under Section 36 of the Arbitration Act commences.
Under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, a court cannot modify an arbitral award through reappraisal of evidence or merits; it is restricted to grounds explicitly stated in the....
The court affirmed that under Section 34, a Civil Court lacks jurisdiction to reappraise evidence in arbitral awards and may only modify awards for clear errors, not on merits.
The arbitrator's authority under the National Highways Act is limited to determining compensation, and parties waive their right to object to awards if they do not raise timely challenges.
The court upheld the discretion under Section 34(4) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act to remit matters to the Arbitrator for addressing gaps in the award, particularly regarding solatium.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.