Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR
HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE MUKULIKA SHRIKANT JAWALKAR
Sunil Shripatrao Dhore – Appellant
Versus
Union of India Secretary Ministry of Shipping Road Transport And Highways Transport – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith.
2. Heard learned Counsel for the petitioners and learned Counsel for respondents. By consent of the parties matter is taken up for final hearing at the stage of admission.
3. Case of the petitioners is that they have file reference by Arbitration Case No. 54/ARB/2023, Mouza Bharathwada, T.S. No.12, Tahsil Nagpur, before the respondent No.2, under Section 3- G (5) of the National Highways Act (‘N.H. Act’ for brevity), for arbitration and enhancement of compensation granted in Land Acquisition Case No. 17/A-65/2015-16, the order dated 23/08/2017, in respect of Survey No. 134 area 0.5800 H.R. of village Bharatwada. The reference was filed along with application for condonation of delay. The petitioners challenge the order of acquisition by the respondent No. 4, for the construction of outer ring road around Nagpur City Building, maintained, management and operation of National Highway on the stretch of land from 7.500 km to 61.800 km (Jamtha, Gondkhiri, Chincholi, Bharatwada, Nara, Bhilgaon, Pawangaon, Dhargaon Section), in Nagpur District, under the provisions of N.H. Act. The respondent No.4, determined the compensation under Section 3-G
The court emphasized a liberal approach to condoning delays in land acquisition cases, allowing petitions despite alternative remedies being available.
Judicial intervention in arbitral proceedings is limited; parties must await the final award unless a right of appeal exists, and a liberal approach is adopted for condoning delays in land acquisitio....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the delay in filing the appeal was unexplained and the subsequent delay condonation application did not provide sufficient cause for the delay....
The court affirmed the discretion under Section 34(4) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act to remit matters to the Arbitrator for reconsideration of solatium, following the Supreme Court's ruling ....
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.
Delay beyond 120 days (90+30) in Section 34 petitions or corresponding appeals under Section 37 of Arbitration Act not condonable via Limitation Act Section 5; negligence, inaction, lack of bonafides....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
