IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH

AT SHIMLA

Arbitration Case No.343 of 2025

Decided on: 18.12.2025

__________________________________________________________ Kanchan Bhatia .....Petitioner

Versus

Government of India and others ....Respondents

Coram

Hon’ble Mr. Justice Ranjan Shafrma, Judge

1Whether approved for reporting? No.

For the petitioner: Mr. Vyom Sharma, Advocate.

For the respondentsr: Mr. Bharat Bhushan, Senior Panel

Counsel, for Respondent No.1-UOI. Mr. Karan Sharma, Advocate, for

Respondents No.2 and 5-NHAI.

C Mr. S.D. Vasudeva and Ms. Ayushi

Negi, Deputy Advocates General, for Respondents No.3, 4 and 6-

State.

Ranjan Sharma, Judge

Petitioner-Kanchan Bhatia, has come up

before this Court in instant petition filed under Section 29-A (4) (5) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act,

1996, seeking following relief:-

“7(i) That the period from 12-05-2020 onwards

may kindly be regularized and the mandate of the Arbitrator may kindly be

extended for a reasonable time.”

FACTUAL MATRIX:

2. Case as setup by Learned Counsel for the

1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment?

petitioner is that pursuant to Notification under Section 3(A) of the National Highways Act, 1956, the Central Government published a Notification to acquire the stretch of land from 106.0002 to 155.800 .Kms. (Solan– Shimla Section), for four lanning etc. in State of Himachal Pradesh. Consequently, the land in 22 villages of Tehsil Shimla [Rural], including the land of petitioner was acquired by Competent Authority/Land Acquisition [referred to as CALA] Award awarding consolidated amount of compensation in respect of whole village.

2(i). Feeling aggrieved against the Award passed by CALA, the petitioner filed a reference petition before Learned Arbitrator-cum-Divisional Commissioner, Shimla, which was registered as Reference Petition No.16 H of 2019, upon which, the Learned Arbitrator commenced arbitral proceedings. Moreover, the Learned Arbitrator order passed the judgment on 02.08.2023 [Annexure A-15] closing the arbitral proceeding on the ground that the mandate had expired and parties may seek extension from Court.

In this backdrop, the petitioner has come up before this Court, for seeking extension of mandate of Arbitrator, so that the arbitral proceedings could be concluded expeditiously.

STAND OF RESPONDENT-NHAI IN REP LY:

3. Notice was issued in these proceedings on 30.10.2025, with direction to file reply, if any. Upon listing of the case today, Mr. Karan Sharma, Learned Counsel for the Respondenot-NHAI, has filed the Reply-

Affidavit.

3(i). In Replyr-Affidavit, the factum that arbitral proceedings continued in Reference Petition No.16 of 2019 till passing of Impugned Orders on 02.08.2023 [Annexure A-1] was not disputed. The Reply-Affidavit in dicates that no fault lies with NHAI but Learned Arbitrator had failed to decide the claim within the stipulated time and had continued with the proceedings H thereafter; when, pleadings were almost complete in

2019 itself. It is averred that instant application has been filed by the petitioner in the year 2025 after an unexplained delay. It is further averred that granting the prayer for extension will result in heavy loss to public exchequer also. In this backdrop, the prayer was made for discussing the present application.

4. Heard, Mr. Vyom Sharma, Learned Counsel, for the petitioner; Mr. Bharat Bhushan, Learned Senior Panel Counsel, for Respondent No.1; Mr. Karan Sharma, Learned Counsel, for Respondents No.2 and 5- National Highway Authority of India a.nd Mr. S.D. Vasudeva and Ms. Ayushi Negi, Learned Deputy Advocates General for Respondents No.3, 4 and 6-

State.

STATUTORY PROVISIONS:

5. For apprreciating the claim of the parties herein, it is necessary to have a recap of the statutory provision of Section 29-A of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 [hereinafter referred to as ‘Act’], re ads as under:-

“29A. Time limit for arbitral award —

g (1) The award in matters other than international commercial