Back
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR
SANJEET PUROHIT
National Highways Autority Of India Through Project Director, Project Implementation Unit, Palanpur – Appellant
Versus
Dev Petroleum Point Through Its Proprietor – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. factual chronology of arbitral appeal (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. appellant's challenge to arbitrator's authority (Para 3) |
| 3. respondent's defense based on precedent (Para 4 , 5 , 6 , 7) |
| 4. estoppel and acquiescence concepts (Para 8 , 9 , 10 , 11) |
| 5. distinction in case facts leading to different outcomes (Para 12 , 13) |
| 6. standard for public policy in arbitral awards (Para 14 , 15 , 16) |
| 7. procedural limits in review of arbitral awards (Para 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21) |
| 8. judicial restraint in reviewing compensation awards (Para 22 , 23) |
| 9. final judgment affirming lower court's decision (Para 24 , 25 , 26) |
ORDER :
SANJEET PUROHIT, J.
1. The present appeal has been preferred by the appellant – National Highways Authority of India (NHAI) under Section 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (“Act of 1996”), being aggrieved by the order dated 04.04.2017 passed by Learned District and Sessions Judge, Sirohi. Learned court below, while dismissing the application preferred by the appellant under section 34 of the Act of 1996, affirmed the Arbitral Award dated 08.11.2013 and the order of the Competent Authority Land Acquisition (“CALA”) dated 13.05.2012.
2. The genesis of the present di
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 nature and status of the land on the date of notification must be considered in determining compensation for land acquired under the NHAI Act, 1956, and settled legal principles must be applied i....
Limited judicial interference with arbitral land compensation awards under Sec.34/37; enhancement for commercial use upheld; separate easementary compensation allowed in partial acquisition affecting....
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 ....
Post-notification sale deeds admissible for compensation if proximate, genuine, uninflated; severance awards upheld on uncontroverted evidence; minimal judicial interference in arbitral awards absent....
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.
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.
Section 29A of Arbitration Act inapplicable to arbitrations under Section 3G(5) of National Highways Act as special code; Central Government exclusive appointment overrides court extension/substituti....
Compensation for land acquisition excludes Electrical Installation and Public Health costs as they are not recognized under relevant statutes.
The court upheld that compensation for land acquisition must reflect market value, and salvage deductions are lawful per established guidelines, affirming the limited appellate jurisdiction over arbi....
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
