Narrow scope under Sections 34/37 of Arbitration Act limits interference with NHAI arbitral awards to patent illegality, not re-appreciating evidence or enhancing compensation.

JUDGMENT :

K. GOVINDARAJAN THILAKAVADI, J.

1. This appeal is filed by the claimant/land owner against the fair and decreetal order dated 21.12.2020 passed in Arbitration O.P.No.96 of 2017 on the file of the Principal District Judge, Villupuram.

2. The brief facts which are necessary for disposal of this appeal are as follows:

The land in Survey No.332/11, measuring 224 sq.mtr. (Main Award), situated in Chinnasalem Village, Chinnasalem Taluk, Kallakurichi District (formerly Villupuram District), belonging to the appellant/land owner, was acquired by the 2nd respondent for laying 4-way lane road under the National Highways Authorities Act for the Salem-Ulundurpet section of National Highway No.68. The acquisition notification under Section 3A(1) of the National Highways Act, 1956 was published in Government of India Gazette No.890 S.O.1564(E) dated 26.06.2008, and 3A(3) notice was also published in Tamil and English dailies on 20.08.2008. The 3D(1) notification was published in Central Gazette No.438/2009 S.O.675(E) dated 13.03.2009 and the 3G(3) enquiry was notified and published in Tamil and English dailies on 12.04.2009.

2.1. The 2nd respondent, after conducting field inspection on 20.07.2009 and classifying the lands, collected 262 sales statistics for the reasonable period from 25.06.2007 to 26.06.2008. The appellant's land in S.F.No.332/11 measuring 224 sq.mtr. was classified as Manai (house site) land and accordingly valued at Rs.860/- per sq.mtr. (Rs.80/- per sq.ft.) based on the data land Document No.2156/2008 dated 16.06.2008 pertaining to S.F.No.330/5, where 1300 sq.ft. was sold at Rs.1,04,000/-, working out to Rs.80/- per sq.ft. (Rs.860/- per sq.mtr.). Additionally, the value of superstructures/trees on the land was fixed at Rs.47,920/-. Accordingly, the Main Award of Rs.1,92,640/- and the tree/superstructure value of Rs.47,920/- with 10% additional compensation totalling Rs.5,97,398/- (including assessment of Rs.4,31,059/- towards demolition value of house) was paid to the appellant, totalling Rs.8,31,735/-.

2.2. The appellant/land owner, dissatisfied with the said amount, sought enhanced compensation under Section 3G(5) of the National Highways Act, 1956. He had earlier filed W.P.No.36938/2015 before the Hon'ble High Court of Madras, and pursuant to the directions of that Court, the matter was considered and enquiry was conducted on 11.03.2016. The 1st respondent/Arbitrator/District Collector, after examining all documents and hearing both sides, passed an Arbitration Award in Na.Ka.(Arbit) A2/2935/2015 dated 04.07.2016. The 1st respondent, considering that the appellant's land is adjacent to Chinnasalem Town and is a well-developed area, enhanced the compensation by 30% over the value fixed by the 2nd respondent at Rs.860/- per sq.mtr. and also allowed 10% additional amount over the enhanced amount, with 9% interest per annum from the date of notification under Section 3D(1) till the date of payment.

2.3. Aggrieved by the Arbitration Award dated 04.07.2016, the appellant/land owner filed an application under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 in Arb.O.P.No.96 of 2017 before the Principal District Judge, Villupuram, praying to set aside the said award and to direct the respondents to pay compensation at Rs.200/- per sq.ft. The learned Principal District Judge, Villupuram, dismissed the said application on 21.12.2020. Aggrieved by this, the present appeal is preferred.

3. The learned counsel for the appellant/land owner would submit that the 1st respondent/Arbitrator failed to appreciate that the property acquired is a house site (Manai) and the 2nd respondent himself admitted it is a Mana