The court can extend the time for arbitral proceedings under sufficient cause, preventing parties from suffering due to delays not attributable to them.

JUDGMENT :

Ranjan Sharma, J.

1. Petitioner [Ghanshyam Mahajan], has come up, before this Court, seeking the following relief(s):-

“It is, therefore, respectfully prayed that in view of the fact stated above the application may kindly be allowed and the time limit for completing the Arbitration proceedings in Arbitration Reference Case No. 900/16 titled as Ghanshyam Mahajan vs. Land Acquisition Officer and others pending before the Ld. Divisional Commissioner (Arbitrator), Mandi, Distt. Mandi, H.P. may kindly be extended for a further period of six months or any other order or directions which this Ld. Court may deem fit be passed in the interest of justice.”

FACTUAL MATRIX:

2. Case of petitioner [Ghanshyam Mahajan] as set-up by Mr. Varun Rana, Learned Counsel, is that pursuant to Notification under Section 3A of the National Highways Act, 1956, the Central Government published a Notification to acquire the stretch of land from Kilometer 126.500 to Kilometer 188.917 (Bilaspur-Nerchowk Section) of National Highway No. 21 for building, widening, maintenance, management and operation of said Highway in State of Himachal Pradesh. Consequently, the land belonging to petitioner at Muhal Thalla/35, Tehsil Sundernagar, Mandi [H.P.] was acquired by CALA i.e. Competent Authority/Land Acquisition in terms of an Award No. 43/2013-14, dated 30.10.2013:

(i)Feeling aggrieved against the Award dated 30.10.2013, passed by Competent Authority for Land Acquisition, the petitioner filed a reference petition under Section 3G(5) of National Highways Act before Learned Arbitrator-cum-Divisional Commissioner, Mandi, Himachal Pradesh which was registered as Reference Petition No. 900 of 2016, whereby, Learned Arbitrator initiated the reference proceedings in June 2016 by directing the NHAI to file reply, which was filed belatedly. Thereafter issues were framed and after recording evidence of PW’s, the matter was taken up by Learned Arbitrator by directing the Respondent-NHAI to lead evidence. Thus, the arbitral proceedings were not concluded within the maximum permissible period of eighteen months as mandated under Section 29A(1) and Section 29A(3) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act.

(ii) It is averred that though the parties participated in arbitral proceedings from time to time, yet, abruptly the Arbitrator has passed an order that since the Award has not been passed within the period of maximum permissible period of eighteen months, therefore, the mandate of Arbitrator stood terminated and consequently, the arbitral proceedings were kept in abeyance, so as to enable the parties to seek extension of mandate or continuance of these proceedings from a competent Court.In this background, the petitioner has set up a case in Para 4 of instant petition, which reads as under:-

“4. The perusal of the record/order sheet would demonstrate that the present reference petition was taken up for hearing jointly with other Case No. 1024/17 titled as Devender Singh vs. L.A.A. Bilaspur and a common Order sheet was maintained. That the parties were summoned on 04-01-2018 for the service and the case was adjourned to 29-01-2018 and 08-02-2018 on which date the service was affected and the case was adjourned to 06-04-2018 for the reply of the Respondents. The parties put appearance on 07-08-2018 but the Respondents failed to file the reply and the case was adjourned to 23-10-2018, 22-01-2019, 05- 04-2019, 13-06-2019, 06-08-2019, 11-10-2019, 06-12-2019 for the same purpose. Thereafter the case was taken up for effective hearing on 07-12-2021 for the same purpose but the Respondents failed to reply, and the right to reply was closed by the Order of the Ld. Arbitrator and the case was adjourned to 27-12-2021 for the evidence of the petitioners. Thereafter the case was taken for effective hearing on 31- 12-2021 and adjourned for the same purpose to 05-04-2022, 31-05-2022, 16-06-2022 and 16-08-2022 on which date at the Application of the Ld. Counsel for the Petitioner the case w