Back
NUPUR BHATI
National Highway Authority of India, Project Director, Project Implementation Unit, Palanpur (Gujarat) – Appellant
Versus
Meena, W/o. Gopal – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
(Nupur Bhati, J.) :
1. The present misc. appeal has been filed by the appellant under Section 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (‘Act of 1996’) assailing the award passed by the learned District Judge, Sirohi, dated 03.09.2021 (Annex.9), whereby the application filed by the appellant under Section 34 of the Act of 1996 has been dismissed. The appellant has also laid a challenge to the amended award passed by the Competent Authority vide order dated 13.05.2013 (Annex.5) and the consequential award dated 15.01.2014 (Annex.7).
2. Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that the appellant issued a Gazette Notification on 27.09.2004 under Section 3A of the National Highways Act, 1956 (‘NHAI Act’) for the purpose of constructing 4-lane highway on N.H.-14 from 246.000 km to 306.000 km and on N.H.-76 from 0.000 km to 21.400 km, which was published on 18.10.2004. Thereafter, objections were received by the Competent Authority and the same were dealt and dismissed vide order dated 04.04.2005 and subsequently, the declaration was issued by the Central Government in accordance with Section 3D of the Act of 1956 and thus, vide the publication made thereto, the said la
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.
Court held that an arbitrator cannot remand matters back to competent authority after initial determination, affirming the arbitrary powers under Section 3G(5) of NHAI Act and the doctrine of acquies....
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.
The court clarified that under Section 34 of the Arbitration Act, the scope of review is limited to setting aside awards for patent illegality or public policy violations, not for modification.
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.
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....
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
