Mohan Singh an Ors. Vs NHAI and Anr. — Arbitration | Himachal Pradesh HC (2026)

Mohan Singh an Ors. Vs NHAI and Anr. — Arbitration | Himachal Pradesh HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Extension effectively granted: the Arbitrator-cum-Divisional Commissioner, Shimla, District Shimla, H.P. directed to conclude the arbitral proceedings and pass the arbitral award in Arbitration Case No. 36 of 2017 on or before 04.12.2026.

Issue for consideration

Whether this Court should grant an extension of time for completion of the arbitration proceedings in Arbitration Case No. 36 of 2017, pending before the Divisional Commissioner-cum-Arbitrator under Section 3 of the National Highways Act, 1956, where the proceedings were not adjudicated within the statutory period.

Court's answer

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

Ratio / Principle

When a statute envisages an authority, be it an Arbitrator, to do a particular act in a particular manner and within a prescribed time schedule, the onus is upon that authority/Arbitrator to perform the entrusted task within the prescribed time, and any delay must be bona fide and explainable.

Key takeaways

In the present case, despite completion of pleadings, the Arbitrator closed the proceedings because the statutory time limit for passing an arbitral award had elapsed.ratio¶17
The Arbitrator-cum-Divisional Commissioner, Shimla, exercising powers under Section 3 of the National Highways Act, 1956, is directed to conclude the arbitral proceedings and pass the arbitral award in Arbitration Case No. 36 of 2017 on or before 04.12.2026.ratio¶18

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 — extension of time for arbitral award — petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India by landowners (Mohan Singh (deceased) through LRs.) whose compensation dispute arose from land acquired under Section 3 of the National Highways Act, 1956 in District Shimla — Reference Petition filed in 2017 before the Arbitrator-cum-Divisional Commissioner, Shimla remained unadjudicated within the statutory period and the Arbitrator closed the proceedings after expiry of the time limit despite completed pleadings — Held: proceedings were conducted in violation of statutory provisions of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996; when a statute prescribes a manner and time schedule for an authority/Arbitrator, the onus lies on it to perform within that schedule and any delay must be bona fide and explainable — Divisional Commissioner-cum-Arbitrator directed to conclude Arbitration Case No. 36 of 2017 and pass the award on or before 04.12.2026 — petition disposed of (Romesh Verma, Judge, Oral).

2026:HHC:22009

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA

CMPMO No. 724 of 2025

Date of decision : 03.06.2026.

Mohan Singh (deceased) through LRs. ...Petitioners. Versus NHAI & another ...Respondents. Coram:

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

Whether approved for reporting?¹ For the petitioners : Kanwar Bhupinder Singh, Advocate. For the respondents : Mr. Karan Sharma, Advocate, for respondent No.1. Mr. Diwakar Dev Sharma, Addl. A.G., for respondent No.2.

Romesh Verma, Judge (Oral):

The present petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India has been filed by the petitioners seeking extension of time for completion of the arbitration proceedings in Arbitration Case No. 36 of 2017, titled as Salig Ram Shandil (deceased) through LRs & others vs. State of H.P. & others, pending before the Divisional Commissioner-cum-Arbitrator for National Highway Authority of India, H.P., exercising the

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

-2-

powers of Arbitrator under Section 3 of the National Highways Act, 1956.

The arbitral dispute has arisen out of the land acquired in District Shimla, H.P. for the purpose of construction of the National Highway, land for which has been acquired under the provisions of National Highways Act, 1956. 3. Feeling aggrieved by the award passed by the competent authority, the landowners have preferred Arbitration Case No. 36 of 2017, before the Arbitrator-cum-Divisional Commissioner, Shimla, and non adjudication of the arbitral proceedings within the statutory period has resulted in filing of the instant petition.

The Reference Petition against the Award was filed by the land owners in the year 2017. According to the petitioners, on account of unforeseen circumstances in the case, which resulted in unnecessary delay in the announcement of the award by the Arbitrator, i.e. the Divisional Commissioner, Shimla, District Shimla, H.P.

This Court has gone through the material available on record carefully and finds that the proceedings have been conducted by the Arbitrator in violation of statutory provisions, as contained in the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. This Court is of the view that when a statute envisages an authority,

-3-

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 Arbitrator has closed the proceedings since the time limit for arbitral proceedings to pass an award had elapsed.

In view of aforesaid discussion and taking into consideration the attending facts and circumstance of the instant case, the Arbitrator-cum-Divisional Commissioner, Shimla, District Shimla, 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 Case No. 36 of 2017, on or before 04.12.2026, 2026.

The petition stands disposed of in the aforesaid

terms.

(Romesh Verma) Judge