Arbitrator Appointed Under The Provisions Of National Highways Act Is Bound By Section 29A Of The A&C Act, Award Must Be Delivered Without Undue Delay: Himachal Pradesh High Court
The Himachal Pradesh High Court has held that an arbitrator appointed under the provisions of National Highways Act, 1956 is bound to deliver an arbitral award within the time limit prescribed under Section 29A of the A&C Act. Section 29A of the A&C Act provides that an arbitrator must make an arbitral award within a period of 12 months from the date of completion of...
The Himachal Pradesh High Court has held that an arbitrator appointed under the provisions of National Highways Act, 1956 is bound to deliver an arbitral award within the time limit prescribed under Section 29A of the A&C Act.
Section 29A of the A&C Act provides that an arbitrator must make an arbitral award within a period of 12 months from the date of completion of the pleadings. It also provides that the parties may, by consent, extend this period by 6 months. Further, it provides that if the award is not made within the extended period, the mandate of the arbitrator shall terminate, unless extended by the Court.
The bench of Justice Bipin Chander Negi remarked that it was pained to observe that the arbitrator appointed under the National Highways Act had conducted the arbitral proceedings in defiance of the strict timelines provided under the A&C Act.
The Court was hearing five applications under Section 29A (4) filed by different parties, who were the owner of the land acquired by NHAI, seeking extension of the mandate of the arbitrator who had failed to make an award on a reference made to him under Section 5 of the National Highways Act.
The Court reiterated that if the award is not made within the period specified or the extended period specified the mandate of the arbitrator shall terminate unless the court has, either prior to or after the expiry of the period so specified, extended the period. The extension may be on the application of any of the parties. The same may be granted only for sufficient cause and on such terms and conditions as may be imposed by the Court.
The Court observed that the arbitrator had adjourned the matter on several occasions and failed to complete the arbitral proceedings in more than 5 years. However, the Court observed that terminating the mandate of the arbitrator at this juncture would result in more prejudice to the petitioners who have been fighting for their rightful claim for years together.
Accordingly, the Court allowed the applications and directed the arbitrator to conclude the arbitral proceedings on or before 31.03.2024.
Case Title: Puran Singh v. Land Acquisition Officer, Arbitration Case No. 684 of 2023
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (HP) 69
Date: 21.09.2023
Counsel for the Petitioners: Mr. Umesh Kanwar and Mr. Amit Singh Chandel
Counsel for the Respondents: Mr. Anup Rattan, Advocate General with Mr. Baldev Singh Negi, Additional Advocate General