Om Parkash (deceased) through LRs Vs UOI and Others — Arbitration | Himachal Pradesh HC (2026)

Om Parkash (deceased) through LRs Vs UOI and Others — Arbitration | Himachal Pradesh HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Extension of time effectively granted: the Arbitrator-cum-Divisional Commissioner, Kangra at Dharamshala, H.P., directed to conclude the arbitral proceedings in Arbitration Reference Case No. 353 of 2022 and pass the arbitral award on or before 19th November, 2026.

Issue for consideration

Whether extension of time should be granted for completion of the arbitration proceedings and passing of the award in Arbitration Reference Case No. 353 of 2022, pending before the Divisional Commissioner, Kangra at Dharamshala, exercising powers of Arbitrator under Section 3 of the National Highways Act, 1956, after the statutory time limit had elapsed.

Court's answer

The arbitration proceedings were conducted by the learned Arbitrator in violation of statutory provisions contained in the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.

Ratio / Principle

Where a statute envisages an authority, be it an Arbitrator, to perform a particular act in a particular manner within a prescribed time schedule, the onus is upon that authority/Arbitrator to perform the task entrusted to it within the time schedule prescribed in the statute.

Key takeaways

Any delay in performance by the statutory authority/Arbitrator has to be bona fide and explainable.ratio¶19
In the present petition, even after completion of the pleadings, the learned Arbitrator had closed the proceedings since the time limit for arbitral proceedings to pass an award had elapsed.ratio¶19
The Arbitrator-cum-Divisional Commissioner, Kangra at Dharamshala, H.P., exercising powers of Arbitrator under Section 3 of the National Highways Act, 1956, is directed to conclude the arbitral proceedings and to pass the arbitral award in Arbitration Reference Case No. 353 of 2022 on or before 19th November, 2026.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Arbitration Case No. 107 of 2026 (Himachal Pradesh High Court, Shimla; decided 19.05.2026; Romesh Verma, J., oral) — Om Parkash (deceased) through his LRs v. Union of India & Ors.: Petition under Section 29(4) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 by the legal heirs of a deceased landowner seeking extension of time to complete arbitration proceedings in Arbitration Reference Case No. 353 of 2022, arising from compensation for land acquired in District Kangra for National Highway construction under Section 3 of the National Highways Act, 1956, pending before the Divisional Commissioner, Kangra at Dharamshala, acting as Arbitrator. Held: (i) proceedings were conducted in violation of statutory provisions of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996; (ii) where a statute prescribes a time schedule, the onus lies on the authority/Arbitrator to perform within it and any delay must be bona fide and explainable; (iii) despite completion of pleadings, the Arbitrator had closed proceedings on expiry of the statutory time limit; (iv) the Arbitrator was directed to conclude the proceedings and pass the award on or before 19th November, 2026. Petition disposed of accordingly.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA

Arbitration Case No. 107 of 2026 Date of decision : 19.05.2026. Om Parkash (deceased) through his LRs

...Petitioners.

	Versus
Union of India & Ors.		….Respondents.
Coram:

The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Romesh Verma, Judge.

Whether approved for reporting?¹ For the Petitioner: Mr. Sanjay Jaswal, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr. Nand Lal Thakur, Advocate for respondents No.1 and 3. Mr. Baldev Singh Negi, Additional Advocate General, for respondent No.2

______________________________________________________________ Romesh Verma, Judge (oral)

Notice.

Mr. Nand Lal Thakur Advocate and Mr. Baldev Singh Negi, learned Additional Advocate General, appear and waive service of notice on behalf of the respective respondents.

The present petition under Section 29 (4) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 has been filed by the petitioner seeking extension of time for completion of the arbitration proceedings in Arbitration Reference Case No.353 of 2022 titled as Om Prakash (deceased) through LRs vs. Union

1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment?

-2-

of India and others pending before the learned Divisional Commissioner Kangra at Dharamshala, District Kangra, H.P. exercising the powers of Arbitrator under Section 3 of the National Highways Act, 1956.

4 The arbitral dispute has arisen out of the land acquired in District Kangra, H.P. for the purpose of construction of the National Highway, under the provisions of National Highways Act, 1956.

5 Feeling aggrieved by the award passed by the competent authority, the landowner has preferred Arbitration Case No. 353 of 2022 before the learned Arbitrator cumDivisional Commissioner, Kangra at Dharamshala, and non adjudication of the arbitral proceedings within the statutory period has resulted in filing of the instant petition.

6 The Reference Petition against the Award was filed by the land owner in the year 2022. According to the petitioner, on account of unforeseen circumstances in the case, which resulted in unnecessary delay in the announcement of the award by the learned Arbitrator, i.e. the Divisional Commissioner, Kangra at Dharamshala, H.P.

7 This Court has gone through the material available on record carefully and finds that the proceedings have been conducted by the learned Arbitrator in violation of statutory

-3-

provisions, as contained in the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. This Court is of the view that when a statute envisages an authority, be it an Arbitrator, to do a particular act in a particular manner and in a prescribed time schedule, then the onus is upon the said authority/Arbitrator to perform the task entrusted to it within the time schedule prescribed in the statute. The delay, if any, has to be bonafide and explainable. However, in the present petition even after completion of the pleadings, the learned Arbitrator has closed the proceedings since the time limit for arbitral proceedings to pass an award had elapsed.

8 In view of aforesaid discussion and taking into consideration the attending facts and circumstance of the instant case, the Arbitrator-cum-Divisional Commissioner, Kangra at Dharamshala, H.P., exercising the powers of Arbitrator under Section 3 of the National Highways Act, 1956 is directed to conclude the arbitral proceedings and to pass the arbitral award in Arbitration Reference Case No. 353 of 2022, on or before 19th November, 2026.

9 The petition stands disposed of in the aforesaid terms.

(Romesh Verma) May 19, 2026 Judge (Veena)