Allowed¶11

National Highway Authority of India v. Jagdish

Himachal Pradesh HC14 Oct 2024OMPM/77/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

NHAI Vs. Jagdish; OMP(M) No.77 of 2023; decided 14.10.2024 by Jyotsna Rewal Dua, J.; condonation of delay 82 days; Section 37 Arbitration and Conciliation Act 1996 appeal; Section 34 objections dismissed by District Judge Bilaspur on 03.09.2022; award dated 05.09.2017 by Divisional Commissioner affirmed; certified copy delay 06.09.2022 to 01.10.2022; stay of execution subject to deposit of entire awarded amount with up-to-date interest within four weeks; Arbitration Case No. 46 of 2018.

What did the court decide?

Delay of 82 days in filing the arbitration appeal under Section 37 condoned; appeal directed to be registered; operation and execution of the judgment dated 03.09.2022 of the District Judge, Bilaspur stayed subject to deposit of the entire awarded amount along with up-to-date interest in the Registry within four weeks. ¶11

National Highway Authority of India Vs Jagdish — Arbitration | Himachal Pradesh HC (2024)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶11

Issue for consideration

Whether the delay of 82 days in instituting the Arbitration Appeal under Section 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 should be condoned. +1 more

¶6

Court's answer

The applicant had genuine and sufficient reasons for not instituting the appeal in time (including time taken to obtain the certified copy and internal approvals); accordingly, the delay of 82 days in filing the arbitration appeal is condoned.

¶11

Ratio / Principle

Operation and execution of the judgment dated 03.09.2022 passed by the learned District Judge, Bilaspur, H.P. in Arbitration Case No. 46 of 2018 shall remain stayed, subject to deposit of the entire awarded amount along with up-to-date interest in the Registry of the Court within four weeks.

¶20

Key takeaways

The appeal is to be registered and listed for consideration on 18.11.2024; both applications stand disposed of.ratio¶21

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Condonation of delay — Arbitration Appeal under Section 37, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 — delay of 82 days in instituting appeal against judgment dated 03.09.2022 of District Judge, Bilaspur (dismissing Section 34 objections and affirming award dated 05.09.2017 of Divisional Commissioner) condoned, the applicant having shown genuine and sufficient reasons, viz., certified copy applied for on 06.09.2022 and made available only on 01.10.2022, internal approvals, and shortage of staff; interim stay of operation and execution of the impugned judgment granted subject to deposit of the entire awarded amount along with up-to-date interest in the Registry within four weeks. Applications disposed of; appeal to be registered and listed on 18.11.2024.

¶1

NHAI Vs. Jagdish

¶2

OMP(M) No.77 of 2023

¶3

14.10.2024 Present: Mr. Sumeet Raj Sharma, Advocate, for the applicant/appellant.

¶4

Mr. Janak Raj, Advocate, vice Mr. Amit Singh Chandel, Advocate for the respondent.

¶5

The applicant in this application seeks

¶6

condonation of delay of 82 days in instituting the Arbitration Appeal under Section 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (Act in short).

¶7

2. The respondent has filed the reply and opposed the application.

¶8

3. Heard learned counsel on both sides and considered the case file as well as pleadings for and against the condonation of delay.

¶9

4. The case of the applicant is that the judgment was pronounced by the learned District Judge, Bilaspur on 03.09.2022, whereby the objection petition preferred by the appellant under Section 34 of the Act was dismissed and the award passed on 05.09.2017 by the Divisional Commissioner was affirmed. The certified copy of the impugned judgment was applied for by the applicant on 06.09.2022, which was prepared on 09.09.2022 and made

¶10

available to the applicant on 01.10.2022. The applicant got approval from its higher officers to file the appeal against the judgment dated 03.09.2022. It has also been mentioned in the application that due to shortage of staff, extracting the relevant documents required in filing the appeal took considerable time. Due to these exigencies, there was delay in instituting the appeal.

¶11

5. On perusing the application, I am satisfied that the applicant had genuine and sufficient reasons for not instituting the appeal in time. Hence, the delay in filing the appeal is condoned.

¶12

6. The application to stand disposed.

¶13

Arb. Appeal No.______/2024

¶14

7. Appeal be registered.

¶15

8. List for consideration on 18.11.2024.

¶16

OMP No.______/2024

¶17

9. Application be registered.

¶18

10. Heard. No reply is intended to be filed to the

¶19

present application.

¶20

Subject to deposit of entire awarded amount alongwith up to date interest in the Registry of this Court within four weeks, operation and execution of 03.09.2022, passed by the learned District Judge Bilaspur, H.P. in

¶21

Arbitration Case No. 46 of 2018 (National Highways Authority of India Vs. Jagdish), shall remain stayed. Application to stand disposed of.

¶22

Jyotsna Rewal Dua Judge

¶23

October 14, 2024 (R.Atal)

National Highway Authority of India v. Jagdish

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

National Highway Authority of India v. Jagdish

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

The Principal Secretary (revenue) and others Vs Hari Dutt and others

Hardyal Singh Vs State of Hp and Others

M/S Hindustan Tin Works Ltd. Vs State of Hp

Manohar Lal and Another Vs Brij Lal (Deceased through Lrs Byasa Devi) and Others

NHAI Vs Sohan Singh

NHAI Vs Sita Ram