IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
JYOTSNA REWAL DUA, J.
National Highway Authority of India - Appellant
Versus
Kamla Devi And Ors. - Respondents
Arb. Appeal No.135 of 2024, Arb. Appeal No. 141 of 2024, Arb. Appeal No. 2 of 2025, Arb. Appeal No. 76 of 2025, Arb. Appeal No. 209 of 2025
Decided On : 08-10-2025
| 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) Notification under Section 3D(1) of the NH Act was issued in the official gazette on 15.12.2012, 08.01.2013 and 15.03.2013.
2(iv) Notification under Section 3G(3) of the NHAI Act inviting claims from interested persons was published in the newspapers on 14.03.2013 and 01.04.2013.
2(v) For the land covered by the above notifications the Competent Authority Land Acquisition (CALA) announced Award No. 17/2013-14 on 05.08.2013. In terms of the award, market value of the land was assessed at Rs. 18,00,000/- per bigha for all kind of lands irrespective of classification and nature in revenue village Palthin Hadbast No. 460 Tehsil Ghumarwin, District Bilaspur, H.P. In all, an area of 58 bighas, 18 biswa and 01 biswansee was acquired in the aforesaid revenue village.
2(vi) Seeking enhancement in the market value of the acquired lands, the land owners filed claim petitions under Section 3G (5) of the NH Act before the notified Arbitrator. Learned Arbitrator passed the award on 05.09.2017 allowing the claim petitions. Market value of the acquired land was enhanced to Rs.21,21,000/- per bigha. The land owners were also held entitled to solatium @30% on compensation amount of acquired property and 9% interest on enhanced compensation amount from the date of taking possession of land till actual deposit.
2(vii) Feeling aggrieved against the enhancement in the market value awarded by the learned Arbitrator, the appellant-NHAI took recourse to Section 34 of the Act and filed applications assailing the award passed in favour of the land owners before the District Judge Bilaspur. All these applications moved under Section 34 of the Act by NHAI were clubbed and vide common judgment passed on 04.09.2023, the same were dismissed. While dismissing the applications, learned District Judge also held that learned Arbitrator had inadvertently not awarded 12% interest per annum on the enhanced market value of the land from the date of the publication of notification under Section 3A till the award by the competent authority or till the date of taking possession of the land, whichever was earlier; This being a statutory interest payable under Section 23(1-A) of the LAND ACQUISITION ACT , was also required to be awarded to the land owners; Award of such interest would not alter or modify the arbitral award as it was only a statutory interest component liable to be paid in view of mandate in Union of India & Anr. Vs. Tarsem Singh & Ors., 2019 (9) SCC 304 Learned District Judge in addition to 30% solatium and 9% interest per annum awarded by the learned Arbitrator, accordingly also allowed 12% interest to the land owners under Section 23(1-A) of the LAND ACQUISITION ACT .
It is in the aforesaid background that NHAI has now taken recourse to Section 37 of the Act for assailing t
Union of India & Anr. Vs. Tarsem Singh & Ors.
Spl. Land Acquisition Officer & Anr. vs. M.K. Rafiq Saheb
Collector of Lakhimour v. Bhuban Chandra Dutta
Prithvi Raj Taneja v. State of M.P.
Kausalya Devi Bogra v. Land Acquisition Officer
Bhagwathula Samanna and Ors. v. Special Tahsildar and Land Acquisition Officer
Revenue Divisional Officer, Chittoor v. Smt. L. Kamalamma (dead) by Lrs. and others
Smt. Basavva and Ors. v. Special Land Acquisition Officer and Ors.
Lal Chand vs. Union of India & Anr.
C.R.Nagaraja Shetty (2) vs. Spl. Land Acquisition Officer and Estate Officer & Anr.
Nelson Fernandes and Others Vs. Special Land Acquisition Officer, South Goa & Ors.
Viluben Jhalejar Contractor Vs. State of Gujarat
Land Acquisition Officer Vs. Nookala Rajamallu
Kasturi & Ors. vs. State of Haryana
Mahanagar Telephone Nigam Limited Vs. Applied Electronics Limited
Kanwar Singh v. Union of India
Konkan Railway Corporation Ltd. Vs. Chenab Bridge Project Undertaking
Dyna Technologies Pvt Ltd v. Crompton Greaves Limited
Ssangyong Engineering. & Construction Company Ltd. v. National Highways Authority of India (NHAI)
parsa Kente Collieries Ltd. v. Rajasthan Rajya Vidyut Utpadan Nigam Ltd.
Bombay Slum Redevelopment Corporation Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Samir Barain Bhojwani
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.
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.