Introductory:-

1. The applicability of the provisions of the Limitation Act, 1963, and more particularly Article 137 to the statutory arbitration under Section 3G(5) of the National Highways Act, 1956, is the substantial issue raised in these intra court appeals and the related Writ Petitions for our determination. These intra-Court appeals have been filed by the Project Director, Project Implementation Unit, National Highways Authority of India challenging the orders passed in the respective Writ Petitions, wherein, the writ Court had directed initiation of Arbitration proceedings under Section 3-G(5) of the National Highways Act for determination of the value of the lands belonging to the landowners whose lands were acquired for the purpose of construction of National Highways. The Writ Petitions viz., W.P. Nos. 9250, 9251 and 9181 of 2016 have been filed challenging the orders of the 1st respondent viz., the District Collector/Arbitrator dated 31.12.2015 in and by which the representations of the petitioners in the respective Writ Petitions were rejected by the District Collector/Arbitrator as barred by limitation.

The necessary facts that led to the filing of the Writ Petitions are as follows:

2. The lands belonging to several persons in the district of Erode were acquired for the purpose of widening the National Highway No. 47 by the competent Authority under the National Highways Act, 1956. The Authorised Officer determined the compensation payable to the land owners under Section 3-G(1) of the National Highways Act, 1956. The land owners submitted applications invoking Section 3-G(5) of the National Highways Act, 1956 to the Arbitrator appointed by the Central Government on various dates. The Arbitrator by separate orders, rejected the claims for Arbitration on the ground that the applications seeking Arbitration have been made 3 years after passing the order determining the compensation under Section 3-G(1). The basis of the conclusion was that the claims are barred by limitation in view of Article 137 of the Limitation Act. The orders were challenged in various Writ Petitions before the writ court.

3. The learned Single Judge allowed those Writ Petitions by directing the Authorities to initiate Arbitration proceedings as per Section 3-G(5) of the National Highways Act, 1956. The learned Single Judge had proceeded on the premise that the rejection of the applications were not justified inasmuch as the landowners have claimed to have made several representations earlier.

4. The National Highways Authority has come forward with these intra-Court appeals, challenging the orders passed by the writ court. The Writ Petitions viz., W.P. Nos. 9250, 9251 and 9181 of 2016 have also been directed to be posted along with these appeals as the orders impugned in the Writ Petitions are also similar to the orders that were set aside in the other Writ Petitions which are the subject matter of the intra court Appeals.

Summary of submissions:-

5. (a) Mr. Richardson Wilson, the learned counsel appearing for the appellant would contend that a reference to Arbitration or initiation of Arbitration proceedings under Section 3-G(5) of the National Highways Act, 1956 is not automatic. The learned counsel by pointing out that Section 3-G(5) contemplates an application by either of the parties for the purposes of initiating Arbitration proceedings, would contend that such an application must be made within a period of 3 years as provided under Article 137 of the Limitation Act.

(b) The learned counsel would also point out that Section 3-G(6) makes the provisions of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act applicable to Arbitrations under the National Highways Act, 1996. He invited our attention to the provisions of Section 43 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1956, which makes the provisions of the Limitation Act, 1963 applicable to the