Post-notification sale deeds admissible for compensation if proximate, genuine, uninflated; severance awards upheld on uncontroverted evidence; minimal judicial interference in arbitral awards absent patent illegality or perversity.

JUDGMENT :

ARUN R. PEDNEKER, J.

1. By the present Arbitration Appeals, the appellant – National Highway Authority of India has challenged the order passed by the learned Principal District Judge under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, whereby the application filed by the appellant under Section 34 of the said Act came to be rejected and the arbitral award passed by the learned Arbitrator under Section 3G(5) of the National Highways Act, 1956 came to be confirmed.

2. Since all the Arbitration Appeals involve common questions of fact and law, they are taken up together for hearing and are being disposed of by this common judgment.

3. For the sake of convenience, the facts in Arbitration Appeal No.103 of 2025 alone are referred to. The brief facts of the appeal are as under :

The National Highways Authority initiated acquisition proceedings for the purpose of widening National Highway No.6 from Jalgaon, Maharashtra to the Gujarat boundary. A notification under Section 3A of the National Highways Act, 1956 was issued on 11/11/2011. The said notification was published in the newspapers pursuant to communication dated 30/12/2011 and the public notice was published on 23/01/2012. Subsequently, a declaration under Section 3D of the said Act was issued on 10/10/2012.

4. The Competent Authority for Land Acquisition (CALA) thereafter passed an award determining compensation at the rate of Rs.340/- per square meter. In addition thereto, compensation to the extent of 10% of the amount was granted towards easementary rights. The lands were classified into two groups, wherein the lands situated at village Kothali and village Muktainagar were treated as belonging to the same group.

5. Being dissatisfied with the amount of compensation awarded by the Competent Authority, the claimants preferred arbitration proceedings under Section 3G(5) of the National Highways Act seeking enhanced compensation as well as statutory benefits under Section 3G(7)(a) to (d) of the Act.

6. Before the Arbitrator, the claimants relied upon several sale instances and led evidence in support of their claim. The relevant sale deeds relied upon are as under:

(I) Sale Deed No.1674 of 2005 dated 22/11/2005 showing consideration at the rate of Rs.3022/- per square meter in respect of Plot No.7 from land Gut No.562 situated at village Muktainagar.

(ii) Sale Deed No.217 of 2010 dated 25/01/2010 showing consideration at the rate of Rs.3375/- per square meter in respect of land Gut No.1075 situated at village Muktainagar.

(iii) Sale Deed No.331 of 2012 dated 13/02/2012 showing consideration at the rate of Rs.4000/- per square meter in respect of land Gut No.542/1 and 543, Plot No.40 situated at village Muktainagar.

Apart from the above sale deeds, other sale instances pertaining to nearby villages were also placed on record.

7. Upon appreciation of the material on record, the learned Arbitrator held that the registered sale deed dated 13/02/2012 was the most proximate in point of time and therefore could be relied upon for determination of market value. The Arbitrator further held that the claimants were entitled to compensation for severance and loss of property in terms of Section 3G(7)(b) and Section 3G(7)(c) of the National Highways Act. Accordingly, by award dated 26/07/2021 the Arbi