2026:CGHC:18302-DB NAFR Digitally signed by HARNEET HARNEETKAUR KAUR Date:

2026.04.23

18:00:16 HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR +0530 ARBA No. 25 of 2025

1 - Anand Khedia S/o S/o Late Radheshyam Khedia Aged About 53 Years R/o A-30, Rama Life City, Sakri, Tahsil Takhatpur, District Bilaspur (C.G.) 2 - Murli Khedia S/o Late Radheshyam Khedia Aged About 50 Years R/o A- 30, Rama Life City, Sakri, Tahsil Takhatpur, District Bilaspur (C.G.) 3 - Vinod Khedia S/o Late Radheshyam Khedia Aged About 48 Years R/o A-30, Rama Life City, Sakri, Tahsil Takhatpur, District Bilaspur (C.G.) 4 - Balmukund Khedia S/o Late Radheshyam Khedia Aged About 45 Years R/o A-30, Rama Life City, Sakri, Tahsil Takhatpur, District Bilaspur (C.G.) 5 - Vyenkateshwar Khedia S/o Late Radheshyam Khedia Aged About 45 Years R/o A-30, Rama Life City, Sakri, Tahsil Takhatpur, District Bilaspur (C.G.)

... Appellants versus

1 - Commissioner Cum Arbitrator Bilaspur Divison Bilaspur District Bilaspur (C.G.) 2 - Competent Authority Land Acquisition And Sub Divisional Officer Revenue Bilaspur Tahsil And District Bilaspur (C.G.) 3 - Project Director National Highways Authorites Of India Project Operation Unit Abhilasha Parisar, New Bus Stand Bilaspur, Tahsil And District Bilaspur (C.G.)

... Respondent(s)

For Appellants : Mr. Ratnesh Kumar Agrawal, Advocate For Respondents No. : Mr. Amit Buxy, Dy. G.A.

1 and 2 For Respondent No. 3 : Mr. Dhiraj Kumar Wankhede, Advocate DB- Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal Hon’ble Shri Justice Sachin Singh Rajput Judgment On Board

22.04.2026 Sanjay K. Agrawal, J.

1. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the order dated 21/10/2025 (Annexure A/1) passed by the 2^nd Addi (Commercial Court), District Judge Level, District Bilaspur in Miscellaneous Judicial Case No. 577/2021 whereby the application filed by the appellants herein under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter, referred as “the Act of

1996”) has been rejected finding no merit, this appeal under Section 37 of the Act of 1996 read with Section 13 of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015 (hereinafter, referred as “the Act of

2015”) has been preferred by the appellants.

2. The challenge in the present appeal has been made on the following factual backdrop :-

(i) Appellants’ land was compulsorily acquired under the provisions of National Highways Act, 1956 (hereinafter, referred as “the Act of 1956”) and subsequently, on 01/07/2018, award was passed by the competent authority i.e. Land Acquisition and Sub-Divisional Officer (Revenue), Bilaspur i.e. respondent No. 2 herein vide Annexure A/3.

(ii) Thereafter, being aggrieved with the impugned award dated 01/07/2018 (Annexure A/3), the appellants herein preferred an application under Section 11 of the Act of 1996 (Amended Act 2013) read with Section 3G(7) of the Act of 1956 (Annexure A/4) seeking enhancement of amount of compensation, which stood dismissed by the Statutory Arbitrator/Commissioner, Bilaspur Division i.e. respondent No. 1 herein by order dated 13/09/2021 (Annexure A/9) holding that no ground warranting interference in the award passed by the respondent No. 2 has been made out.

(iii) Pursuant thereof, the appellants then preferred application under Section 34 of the Act of 1996 (Annexure A/10) before the District Judge, Bilaspur on 22/11/2021 which was entertained by the said Court on 01/12/2021 and notices were issued to the respondents, and ultimately, on 07/02/2024, in light of the notification dated 20/12/2023 issued by the State Government through the Law and Legislative Affairs Department, it was held that since the value of the present dispute falls in between ten lakhs to fifty lakhs, therefore, learned 2nd Additional District Judge, Commercial Court (District Judge Level), Bilaspur will have the jurisdiction to take cognizance of the matter.

(iv) Finally, vide impugned order dated 21/10/2025 (Annexure A/1), the 2nd Additional District Judge, Commercial Court (District Judge Level), Bilaspur rejected t