Dismissed

Tulsi Gupta v. Union of India Thru. Road Transport and National Highway Parivahan Bhawan, New Delhi and 5 Others

Allahabad HC11 Nov 2022/7904/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petition sought a writ of certiorari to quash an award and enhance compensation via mandamus based on district circle rates. The court held the petition was not maintainable due to the finality of arbitral awards under Section 35. The petitioner was directed to approach the appropriate court under Section 34 within the limitation period.

What did the court decide?

The instant writ petition was dismissed at the admission stage.

Tulsi Gupta Vs Union of India Thru. Road Transport and… — Arbitration | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 21

¶2

Case :- WRIT - C No. - 7904 of 2022

¶3

Petitioner :- Tulsi Gupta Respondent :- Union Of India Thru. Road Transport And National Highway Parivahan Bhawan, New Delhi And 5 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Vikas Pandey Counsel for Respondent :- A.S.G.I.,C.S.C.,Sarvesh Kumar Dubey

¶4

Hon'ble Mohd. Aslam,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Vikas Pandey, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Ambrish Rai, learned counsel for respondent no.1, Sri Gopal Krishna Pathak, learned A.C.S.C. for respondent nos.2 to 5, Sri Sarvesh Kumar Dubey, learned counsel for the respondent no.6 and perused the record.

¶6

The instant petition has been filed with the prayer to issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari for quashing the impugned order dated 18.7.2022 passed by respondent no.3Additional Commissioner (Administration), Lucknow Division, Lucknow and further to issue a writ order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents to enhance the compensation amount to the petitioner relates to Khata No.495, Plot No.191 & 233, Khasara No.600 situated in village Gaharo, Pargana Bijnaur, Tehsil Lucknow (now Sarojani Nagar), District Lucknow as per district circle rate as a residential purpose in the interest of justice.

¶7

I have gone through the file. Section 35 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 states that subject to this Part an arbitral award shall be final and binding on the parties and persons claiming under them respectively. It is provided in section 34 of the said Act that the application for setting aside arbitral award on the ground mentioned under section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, may be moved by aggrieved parties within three months from the date of passing of the award. It is further provided that if the Court is satisfied that the applicant was prevented by sufficient cause from making the application within the said period of three months it may entertain the application within a further period of thirty days, but not thereafter. According to provision of section 35 of Arbitration and Conciliation Act, finality has been attached to the arbitral award and the statutory remedy is provided under section 34 for challenging the award on the ground mentioned in the said section.

¶8

In such circumstances, the instant writ petition is not maintainable and is liable to be dismissed. Accordingly, the instant petition is dismissed at the admission stage. However, it is open for the petitioner to move application under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act before appropriate court within limitation period as provided under section 34(3) of the Act.

¶9

Let certified copy of the papers be returned to the counsel for petitioner after retaining its photocopy as per rule.

¶10

Order Date :- 11.11.2022 Anil K. Sharma

¶11

Digitally signed by ANIL KUMAR SHARMA Date: 2022.11.12 14:28:27 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Tulsi Gupta v. Union of India Thru. Road Transport and National Highway Parivahan Bhawan, New Delhi and 5 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Tulsi Gupta v. Union of India Thru. Road Transport and National Highway Parivahan Bhawan, New Delhi and 5 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Rudal Singh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Food and Supply Lko. and 8 Others

Jai Ma Gange Mahila Swayam Sahayta Samooh,Raibareli Thru. Treasurer Usha Devi Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Food and Civil Supply, Lko. and 4 Others

Arun Kumar Singh and Others Vs Bhagawat Saran Singh and Others

Smt.Madhulika Dubey Vs Union of India Thru Road Transport and National Highway New Delhi and 5 Others

Manmohan Singh Yadav Vs Union of India Thru. Road Transport and National Highway New Delhi and Others

Rakesh Kumar Yadav Vs Addl. Commissioner Arbitrator Lko. Region Lko. and 3 Others