IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH

AT SHIMLA

Arbitration Case No.284 of 2025

Decided on: 06.01.2026

__________________________________________________________

Sunil Dutt

.....Petitioner

Versus

National Highway Authorityo of India

and another ....Respondents

Coram

Hon’ble Mr. Justice Ranjan Sharma, Judge

1Whether approved for reporting? No

For the petitioner: Mr. G.R. Palsra Advocate.

For the respondents: Ms. Sneh Bhimta, Advocate vice

C Ms. Shreya Chauhan, Advocate,

for Respondent No.1-NHAI.

Mr. S.D. Vasudeva, Deputy Advocate General, for Respondents

No.2 -State.

Ranjan Sharma, Judge

H Petitioner-Sunit Dutt has come up before

this Court in instant petition filed under Section 29-A of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996,

seeking following relief:-

“It is therefore, most respectfully prayed that this application/petition may very kindly be allowed and the impugned order dated 27.12.2022 passed in Case No.298/2018 alongwith other connected

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

matter may kindly be set aside/quashed and the time period in this case may kindly be extended for 6 months and the Ld. Arbitrator-cumP-Divisional Commissioner Mandi, Division Mandi may kindly be directed to decide the case No.298/2018 in a time bound manner and justice be done.”

FACTUAL MATRIX:

2. Grievance of the petitioner is that the Central Government tissued a Notification under the National Highways Act for acquiring the land at Village Muhal Masad/438, Tehsil Sadar, District Mandi, was acquired, in terms of the Award No. 13/2016-17 dated

08.02.2017.

h2(i) Feeling dissatisfied against the Award, the petitioners filed a Reference before Learned Arbitrator- cum-Divisional Commissioner, Mandi under Section 3G (5) to 7 of the National Highways Act vide Reference No.298 of 2018; In re: Sunil Dutt Versus National Highway Authority of India. Perusal of the petition indicates that even after the completion of pleadings, Learned Arbitrator could not conclude the proceedings within the prescribed period of 12 months. Thereafter, with consent of the parties, the time for concluding the arbitral proceedings was extended.

It is in this backdrop that the instant petition has been filed, assailing the orders dated 27.12.2022 in case No.298 of 2018 passe.d by Learned Arbitrator with the prayer to direct the concerned Arbitrator to conclude the arbitral proceedings under Section 29-A(4)(5) of Arbitration and Conciliation Act.

STAND OF RESPONDENT No.1 [NHAI] :

3. Upon rlisting of this case today, Ms. Sneh Bhimta, Advocate appearing on behalf of Ms. Shreya Chauhan, Learned Counsel for Respondent No.1- National Highway Authority of India, has filed the re ply objecting to the prayer for extension of time, on the ground that the orders were passed by the Arbitrator- cum-Divisional Commissioner Mandi on 27.12.2022 and H the application has been filed belatedly. 4. Learned State Counsel states that since the contesting respondent is NHAI-Respondent No.1, therefore, no reply is intended to be filed on behalf of Respondents No. 2 -State.

5. Heard, Mr. G.R. Palsra, Learned Counsel for the petitioner; Ms. Sneh Bhimta, Advocate appearing on behalf of Ms. Shreya Chauhan, for Respondent No.1-

NHAI; and Mr. S.D. Vasudeva, Learned Deputy Advocate General for Respondent No.2.

STATUTORY PROVISIONS:

6. In order to appreciate the claim of the parties herein, it is necessary to have a recap of the statutory provision of Section 29A of the Arbitration and Conciliatoion Act, 1996 [hereinafter referred to as ‘Act’], reads as under :-

“29Ar. Time limit for arbitral award-

u(1) The award in matters other than international commercial arbitration shall be made by the arbitral tribunal within a period of twelve months from the date of completion of pleadings under subsection (4) of section 23:

Provided that the award in the matter of h international commercial arbitration may be made as expeditiously as possible and g endeavor may be made to dispose of the matter within a period of twelv