Back
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENGH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
V.BHAVANI SUBBAROYAN, K.K.RAMAKRISHNAN
Project Director – Appellant
Versus
A.P.R. Jhanagiraman – Respondent
JUDGMENT
[Judgment of the Court was made by K.K. RAMAKRISHNAN .J.]
The appeal in C.M.A.(MD).No.232 of 2024 has been filed by the National Highways Authority, challenging the Arbitration award passed in A.R.O.P.No.47/2018 dated 23.06.2023 filed by the land owner to set aside the arbitration award by the Collector/Arbitrator dated 22.02.2018.
2. The first respondent owned lands along Dindigul – Theni and Theni - Kumuli National Highways Roads in the Survey Nos. 1943/1(Partly)-326, 1943/3(Partly)-1072 (totally 1398 sq.metres or 34.544 cents) situated at “Thamaraikulam Bit II Village”, Theni District. The Ministry of Shipping, Road Transport and Highways (Department of Road, Transport and Highways) issued the notification dated 18.06.2012 for acquisition of an extent of 1398 sq.mtr., or 34.544 cents of dry lands belonging to the respondents’ under Section 3(A) of the National Highways Act, 1956 (herein after called as “NHAI Act”) for expanding and laying four way track (National Highways road from Dindigul – Theni and Theni - Kumuli (NH45-Extn., & 220) under “the Golden Quadrilateral Scheme”. The National Highways Authority of India, (herein after called “NHAI”) is the implementing author
The court established that under statutory arbitration for land acquisition, the authority must ensure fair compensation based on proper assessment and documentation, highlighting a constitutional ob....
The court upheld the authority to modify arbitration awards in compensation cases if the original decision is perverse or against public policy, ensuring fair compensation is granted to landowners.
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.
The court affirmed the necessity of a judicial approach in determining compensation for land acquisition, allowing for modification of arbitral awards under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Concilia....
Narrow scope of judicial interference under Sections 34/37 Arbitration Act in NHAI land awards; no re-appreciation of evidence or modification.
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.
Narrow scope of judicial interference under Sections 34/37 Arbitration Act in NHAI land awards; cannot re-appraise evidence or enhance compensation without perversity.
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....
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
