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
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 dispute lies in the Central Government’s project to extend National Highway No. 14 along the stretch from 246.000 kms to 306.400 kms. For this public purpose, a notification under Section 3A of the National Highways Act, 1956 (“Act of 1956”) was issued on 27.09.2004, identifying various land parcels for acquisition, including Khasra No. 1240 in the revenue village of Santpur, ad-measuring 0.1537 hectares.
2.1. Following the statutory procedure for hearing objections, the Central Government issued a notification under Section 3D of the Act of 1956 on 28.06.2005, whereby the acquisition of a portion of Khasr
Bhartiya Rashtriya Rajmarg Pradhikaran v. Rajesh Kaushik
The Chairman, State Bank of India and Anr. v. M.J. James
MMTC Limited vs. Vedanta Limited
UHL Power Co. Ltd. v. State of H.P.
Punjab State Civil Supplies Corporation Limited & Anr. vs. M/s Sanman Rice Mills & Ors.
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 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.