Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
JYOTSNA REWAL DUA
National Highway Authority of India – Appellant
Versus
Kamla Devi – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. land acquisition notifications and compensation proceedings. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5) |
Jyotsna Rewal Dua, J.
Feeling aggrieved against the common award passed by the learned Arbitrator under Section 3G (5) of the National Highways Act, 1956 as also the common judgment passed by the learned District Judge, Bilaspur, deciding the applications moved by the appellant under Section 34 of the ARBITRATION AND CONCILIATION ACT (for short the Act), instant appeals under Section 37 of the Act have been preferred by the National Highway Authority of India.
Arising out of the common award passed by the learned Arbitrator and common judgment rendered by the learned District Judge as also involving the common questions, these appeals have been taken up together for decision.
2. Facts:-
2(i) These appeals arise out of acquisition of land by the appellant in Mohal Palthin, Tehsil Ghumarwin, District Bilaspur.
2(ii) Notification under Section 3A(1) of the National Highways Act, 1956 (for short the NH Act) was published in the official gazette on 21.04.2012 and 17.08.2012 for acquiring the subject land for four laning of NH-21 (between Bilaspur and Nerchowk Section)
2(iii)
In highway acquisitions under NH Act, small sale deeds usable for large tracts with deduction (no development charges needed); adjacent similar lands comparable; no 12% interest under LAA 23(1-A) per....
The appeal emphasized the narrow scope of intervention under arbitration law, confirming reliance on smaller land sale deeds for larger valuations with required adjustments, and clarified interest aw....
Important points:After making an elaborate survey of the rule position that the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act 1894, relating to solatium and interest contained in Section 23(1A) and (2) and ....
Narrow scope of judicial interference under Sections 34/37 Arbitration Act in NHAI land awards; no re-appreciation of evidence or modification.
Narrow scope under Sections 34/37 of Arbitration Act limits interference with NHAI arbitral awards to patent illegality, not re-appreciating evidence or enhancing compensation.
Narrow scope of judicial interference under Sections 34/37 Arbitration Act in NH Act awards; no re-appreciation of evidence or modification of compensation.
Narrow scope of judicial interference under S.34/37 Arbitration Act; courts cannot re-appreciate evidence or modify land compensation awards under NH Act.
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
