SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2016 Supreme(P&H) 3087

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
Amit Rawal, J.
Govt. of India and Another – Appellants
Versus
Des Raj (Dead) Through LRs. and Others – Respondents
FAO No. 7632 of 2015
Decided On : 11-05-2016

Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellant : R.S. Madan.

The main legal point established is the importance of complying with arbitration awards within the prescribed period and the authority's duty to take action against officials for non-compliance.

Headnote:

Arbitration - National Highway - Setting aside of award under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 - The court dismissed the objection seeking setting aside of the award on the ground of limitation as well as on merits. The court directed the National Highway Authority to initiate departmental proceedings against concerned officials for dereliction and non-compliance of the award.

Fact of the Case:

The appellant, National Highway, filed an objection seeking setting aside of the arbitration award on the ground of limitation and merits. The appellant argued that the objection was not barred by limitation as the copy of the award was not supplied in time. The court noted the tardy attitude of the National Highway in not filing a reply for almost a year and not complying with the award.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the objection was filed beyond the prescribed period and that the compensation awarded was not on the higher side. The court directed the National Highway Authority to initiate departmental proceedings against concerned officials for non-compliance of the award and dereliction of duty.

Issues: The issues involved the objection filed by the National Highway seeking setting aside of the arbitration award on the ground of limitation and merits.

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the objection was filed beyond the prescribed period and that the compensation awarded was reasonable. The court also emphasized the need for the National Highway Authority to take action against concerned officials for non-compliance of the award.

Final Decision: The court dismissed the appeal, finding no ground for interference.

JUDGMENT :

Amit Rawal, J.

1. The appellant-National Highway is aggrieved of the dismissal of the objection filed under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter to be referred as 'the Act') seeking setting aside of the award dated 25.07.2011, having been dismissed on the ground of limitation as well as on merits.

2. Mr. R.S. Madan, learned counsel appearing on behalf of appellant submits that though appellant participated in the proceedings before the Arbitrator but the copy of the award as per provision of Sub-Section 5 of Section 31 was not supplied. On receipt of the same, the objection was filed on 31.07.2012. There was no delay and, therefore, objection cannot be said to have been barred as per the provision of Sub-Section 3 of Section 34 of the Act. The arbitrator had assessed the compensation at the rate of Rs. 70,000/- per marla which is on the higher side and also imposed the condition of interest at the rate of 9%, 15%, 18% if payment is not deposited during the time granted vide notification. Awarded compensation is phenomenal thus not sustainable, and thus urges this Court for setting aside of the award.

3. I have heard learned counsel for the appellant and appraised the paper book.

4. The arbitration proceedings were initiated on 19.07.2010. For almost one year, National Highway did not file the reply as noticed by the arbitrator and thereafter contested the case and chose to file the objection beyond period i.e. 90+30 days. Even did not deposit Rs. 70,000/- per marla as awarded by the Arbitrator and as per award therefore held liable to pay 18% interest. It is intriguing that officer concerned are not obtaining copy of award of the Arbitrator and approaches Courts in a most callous and lackadaisical manner. They have no regard and respect to the order of the Court and orders are being flouted with impunity. Tax payers money is being squandered away owing to the payment of heavy interest imposed on the National Highway on account of non-compliance of award.

5. I am of the view that such type of dereliction should not go unnoticed by the Court. The tardy attitude has already been noticed by the Arbitrator. I am of the view that the element of interest is liable to be recovered from the officer concerned who has chosen not to file the reply before the Arbitrator within the time frame i.e. for almost for one year and thereafter chose to file the appeal and objection before the Objecting Court knowing fully that the objections were not within a period of limitation. National Highway Authority is directed to initiate the departmental proceedings in accordance with law against concerned officials and submit a report failing which the Court may not be compelled to take the action as a natural corollary. Even otherwise no explanation has come forth in filing the appeal beyond the period prescribed under Sub-Section 3 of Section 34 of the Act. Even on merits, acquisition is based on the reasonable criterion and on the basis of awards already passed thus enhancement of compensation is not on the higher side. Land has been acquired for the purpose of winding up of the National Highway-1A i.e. from Jalandhar to Pathankot.

6. No ground for interference is made out.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

AI

SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top