NATIONAL HIGHWAYS AUTHORITY OF INDIA v. COURT OF KARNATAKA
Case at a glance
Outcome
Disposed of
Accordingly, the appeal is disposed of
Provisions considered
Key paragraphs
- Para 66. In view of the above, the impugned order is set aside. We clarify that the impugned award has attained finality. Accordingly, the appeal is disposed of.
Judgment
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C M JOSHI COMMERCIAL APPEAL NO. 161 OF 2025 BETWEEN: NATIONAL HIGHWAYS AUTHORITY OF INDIA, PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION UNIT, DOOR NO.3-29, BETHEL, THARETHOTA, NEAR PUMPWELL (NH-66), MANGALORE-575 005. REP. BY ITS DGM (TECH) & PROJECT DIRECTOR MR. ABDULLA JAVED AZMI. (BY MR. BIDAN CHANDRAN, ADVOCATE ALONG WITH SRI PADMANABHA HOLLA S, ADVOCATE) …APPELLANT AND: Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
SRI SANTHOSH HEGDE, MAJOR, S/O. LATE RAMAKRISHNA HEGDE, R/AT. HEGDE MAHAL, PINTO'S LANE, MANGALORE TALUK, DAKSHINA KANNADA DISTRICT-575 004.
THE ARBITRATOR (N.H) AND DEPUTY COMMISSIONER AND ARBITRATOR, DAKSHINA KANNADA DISTRICT, MANGALORE-575 001.
THE COMPETENT AUTHORITY AND THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER, - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:30772-DB COMAP No. 161 of 2025 HC-KAR MANGALURU, KARNATAKA, STATE EMPLOYEES ASSOCIATION, CLOCK TOWER, HAMPANKATTA, MANGALURU-575 001. (BY MS. THANIMA BEKAL, ADVOCATE FOR R-1) …RESPONDENTS THIS COMAP/COMMERCIAL APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SEC.13(1-A) OF COMMERCIAL COURTS ACT, 2015, PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 07.02.2025 PASSED BY THE IV ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE AND COMMERCIAL COURT, D.K. MANGALURU IN ARBITRATION PETITION NO. 330/2023 AND CONSEQUENTLY SET ASIDE ARBITRAL AWARD BEARING NO. C.DIS.ARB (2) NH. LAQ. CR. 98/2018-19 DATED 06.09.2022 PASSED BY THE RESPONDENT NO. 2 AND CONSEQUENTLY. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. VIBHU BAKHRU, CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C M JOSHI ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: HON'BLE MR. VIBHU BAKHRU, CHIEF JUSTICE)
1. The appellant has filed the present appeal under Section 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 [A&C Act], impugning an order dated 07.02.2025, passed by the learned Commercial Court in AP No.330/2023. - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:30772-DB COMAP No. 161 of 2025 HC-KAR
2. The appellant had filed the aforementioned petition under Section 34 (2) of the A&C Act, impugning an arbitral award dated 06.09.2022 passed by the Arbitral Tribunal under Section 3G (5) of the National Highway Act, 1956. The Arbitral Tribunal had enhanced the compensation awarded to the respondent for the acquired land falling under Survey No. 15/2CP1 measuring 1095 square meters [27 cents].
3. At the outset learned counsel appearing for the respondent submits that the application filed by the appellant under Section 34 (2) of the A&C Act, was barred by limitation and the Court had no jurisdiction to condone the delay. She submits that an objection to the said effect was raised. However, the learned Commercial Court had not considered the same. She submits that since the impugned award had been upheld, the respondent had not filed any appeal against it, as the respondent was willing to accept the impugned award. She submits that since now an objection has been raised that the respondent - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:30772-DB COMAP No. 161 of 2025 HC-KAR must also be granted an opportunity to assail the said order.
She has handed over a copy of the application filed by the appellant under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, along with his application to set aside the impugned award. The affidavit accompanying the said application indicates that the appellant had received the impugned award on 10.10.2022. The application to set aside the award [AP 330/2023] was instituted on 23.08.2023, as is reflected in the impugned order. Thus, clearly the said application was beyond the period of limitation as prescribed under Section 34(3) of the A&C Act. Further, the period of delay is exceeded the period that could be condoned in terms of the proviso to Section 34(3) of the A&C Act.
The learned counsel appearing for the appellant fairly submits that appellant’s application under Section 34(2) of the A&C Act, itself was beyond the period of limitation. - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:30772-DB COMAP No. 161 of 2025 HC-KAR
Operative part
In view of the above, the impugned order is set aside. We clarify that the impugned award has attained finality. Accordingly, the appeal is disposed of.
Pending IAs, if any, are also disposed of. Sd/- (VIBHU BAKHRU) CHIEF JUSTICE Sd/- (C M JOSHI) JUDGE tsn* List No.: 1 Sl No.: 32
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: Accordingly, the appeal is disposed of
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 — s. 37; Limitation Act, 1963 — s. 5.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.