Back
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
MAHESH CHANDRA TRIPATHI, KUNAL RAVI SINGH
Suryadev Pathak – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent
JUDGMENT
(Per: Mahesh Chandra Tripathi, J.)
1. Heard learned counsels for the petitioners, Sri Pranjal Mehrotra, Sri Raghav Dwivedi and Sri Devendra Kumar, learned counsels for the respondent-National Highway Authority of India, Sri Fuzail Ahmad Ansari, learned Standing Counsel for the State-respondents and Sri Paras Nath Rai, learned Senior Counsel for the Union of India.
1.1. Since all the aforesaid writ petitions involve a common legal issue concerning the maintainability of writ petitions seeking mandamus for time-bound disposal of arbitration proceedings under Section 3G(5) of the NATIONAL HIGHWAYS ACT , 19561 [The Act, 1956] and the applicability of Section 29A of the Arbitration Act and Conciliation, 19962 [The Arbitration Act, 1996] to such statutory arbitrations, and with the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the petitions have been clubbed together, heard analogously, and are being disposed of by this common judgment.
A. PRAYER:
2. All the above-mentioned writ petitions have been preferred for a direction to the respondent - Arbitrator to decide the respective cases of the petitioners within a time bound period.
B. FACTS OF THE CASE:-
3. For the purpose of brevity, onl
Statutory arbitration under the National Highways Act is governed by the Arbitration Act, and any delay allegations must be addressed exclusively in civil court, not via writ petitions.
The High Court held that challenges to arbitral awards under the National Highways Act must be pursued through statutory remedies rather than under Article 226, ensuring procedural fairness in proper....
The court affirmed that when arbitration fails to occur within statutory timelines, the court has the authority to substitute the arbitrator under Section 29A of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act,....
The National Highways Act, 1956 exclusively empowers the Central Government to appoint an arbitrator for determining compensation disputes, overriding general arbitration provisions.
The court emphasized a liberal approach to condoning delays in land acquisition cases, allowing petitions despite alternative remedies being available.
Judicial intervention in arbitral proceedings is limited; parties must await the final award unless a right of appeal exists, and a liberal approach is adopted for condoning delays in land acquisitio....
Extension of arbitration proceedings mandated by the court when delays are not attributable to the parties, ensuring fairness in the arbitral process.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the limitation on the authority's power to remit back the matter under Section 3(G)(5) of the National Highways Act, 1956, and the restrictions on ....
The court emphasized that delays in arbitration due to administrative issues not attributable to the parties justify extending the arbitrator's mandate as per the provisions of the Arbitration and Co....
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
