The court possesses the discretion under Section 29-A(4) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 to extend the time limit for concluding arbitral proceedings when the statutory period has lapsed, provided such an extension serves the interest of justice.

Romesh Verma, Judge

(Oral)

Notice.

Mr. Shivanshu, learned vice counsel and Ms. Vandana Misra, learned Senior Panel Counsel, appear and waive service of notice on behalf of the respective respondents.

The present petition under Section 29-A (4) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 has been filed by the petitioners seeking extension of time for completion of the arbitration proceedings in Arbitration Reference Case No.29 of 2024, titled as Narender Kumar & others vs. Special Land Acquisition Officer, National Highways Authorty of India, pending before the National Highways Authority of India-cum-Divisional Commissioner, Mandi, District Mandi, H.P., exercising the powers of Arbitrator under Section 3(G) of the Naftional Highways Act, 1956.

2. The arbitral dispute has arisen out of the land acquired in District Kullu, H.P. for the purpose of construction of the National Highway, land for which has been acquired under the provisions of National Highways Act, 1956.

3. Feeling aggrieved by the award passed by the compete nt authority, the landowners have preferred Arbitration Reference Case No.29 of 2024, National Highways Authority of India-cum-Divisional Commissioner, Mandi, District Mandi, H.P. and non adjudication of the arbitral proceedings within the statutory period has resulted in filing of the instant petition.

4. The Reference Petition against the Award was filed by the landowners in the year 2024. According to the petitioner, on account of unforeseen circumstances in the case, the same has resulted in unnecessary delay in the announcement of the award by the learned Arbitrator, i.e. National Highways Authority of India-cum-Divisional Commissioner, Mandi, District Mandi, H.P.

5. This Court has gone through the material available on record carefully and finds that the proceedings have been conducted by the Arbitrator in violation of statutory provisions, as contained in the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. This Court is of the view that when a statute envisagesf an authority, be it an Arbitrator, to do a particular act in a particular manner and in a prescribed time schedule, then the onus is upon the said authority/Arbitrator to perform the task entrusted to it within the time schedule prescribed in the statute. The delay, if any, has to be bonafide and explainable. However, in the present petition even after completion of the pleadings, the Arbitrator has closed the proc eedings since the time limit for arbitral proceedings to pass an award had elapsed.

6. In view of aforesaid discussions and taking into consideration the attending facts and circumstances of the instant case, the National Highways Authority of India-cum-Divisional Commissioner, Mandi, District Mandi, H.P., exercising the powers of Arbitrator under Section 3 (G) of the National Highways Act, 1956, is directed to conclude the arbitral proceedings and to pass the arbitral award in Arbitration Reference Case No.29 of 2024, on or before 4th December, 2026. The aforesaid liberty is granted to the petitioners as a matter of indulgence, being the last and final opportunity.

The petition stands disposed of in the aforesaid terms.