M/S. Sarvambh Agro Industries LLP Thr. Its Auth. Sig. Nikhil R. Agrawal v. the Land Acquisition Officer and Dy Collector General Administraion and Ors.
Case brief
What is this about?
Bombay High Court, Division Bench (Manish Pitale & Shreeram V. Shirsat, JJ.), 6 January 2026 — batch of 41 writ petitions; maintainability of Article 226 petition where statutory arbitration under S.19B(8) Maharashtra Highways Act 1955 pending; compensation for easementary and appurtenant rights under S.19B(5) MH Act; alternative remedy; S.34 Arbitration and Conciliation Act 1996 applications; Divisional Commissioner as statutory arbitrator; liberty to amend statement of claim; Resham Singh (P&H) and Tarsem Singh (SC) distinguished; writ petitions disposed with directions, not dismissed.
What did the court decide?
Writ petitions disposed of with liberty: (a) to apply to the Statutory Arbitrator (Divisional Commissioner) in pending arbitral proceedings or substituted arbitrators for amendment of statements of claim to incorporate the Section 19 B(5) MH Act claim; (b) to apply to Competent Courts for amending pending Section 34 Arbitration Act applications to incorporate the same issue; (c) the liberty in clause (a) applies equally where Section 34 applications were allowed and awards set aside with fresh arbitration ordered; (d) the statutory arbitrator and Competent Courts directed to consider such applications sympathetically and in accordance with law without insisting on technicalities; directions apply equally where the arbitrator's mandate has expired and private arbitrators are appointed. Pending applications, if any, also disposed of.