NHAI Vs Rakesh Kumar — Himachal Pradesh HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

NHAI Vs Rakesh Kumar — Himachal Pradesh HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Delay in filing the appeal condoned; appeal admitted with post-admission notice to respondents No.4 and 5; operation, implementation and execution of the impugned judgment dated 04.09.2023 and the arbitral award dated 05.09.2017 stayed during the pendency of the appeal, subject to deposit of the entire awarded amount with up-to-date interest within eight weeks.

Issue for consideration

Whether the delay in filing the appeal against the impugned judgment should be condoned. +2 more

Court's answer

Application for condonation of delay allowed; delay in filing the appeal condoned, being neither intentional nor wilful and having occurred due to unavoidable circumstances, including the failure of the erstwhile law firm to intimate disposal of the case.

Ratio / Principle

Appeal admitted; post-admission notice issued to respondents No.4 and 5, returnable within four weeks on taking steps within three days; records to be requisitioned in the meantime.

Key takeaways

Operation, implementation and execution of the impugned judgment dated 04.09.2023 passed by the learned District Judge, Bilaspur and of the arbitral award dated 05.09.2017 stayed during the pendency of the appeal, subject to deposit of the entire awarded amount along with up-to-date interest by the appellant/applicant within eight weeks.ratio¶22

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Order of Romesh Verma, Judge, dated 05.06.2026, in OMP(M) No.151 of 2024 (NHAI vs. Rakesh Kumar & others): (i) application for condonation of delay in filing the appeal against the judgment dated 04.09.2023 of the learned District Judge, Bilaspur allowed - the delay was averred to be neither intentional nor wilful, arising because the applicant's erstwhile law firm M/s M.V. Kini & Co. (from whom 362 cases pending in District Mandi/Bilaspur had been withdrawn and allotted to M/s Nishaank Mattoo & Associates) never intimated the disposal of the case, despite the certified copy applied for on 06.09.2023 being delivered on 07.10.2023; (ii) appeal admitted, with post-admission notice to respondents No.4 and 5 (duly served but absent, hence proceeded against ex parte) returnable within four weeks on taking steps within three days, and records to be requisitioned in the meantime; (iii) under OMPST No.39341 of 2024, the operation, implementation and execution of the impugned judgment dated 04.09.2023 as well as the arbitral award dated 05.09.2017 stayed during the pendency of the appeal, subject to deposit of the entire awarded amount along with up-to-date interest by the appellant/applicant within eight weeks.

NHAI vs. Rakesh Kumar & others

OMP(M) No.151 of 2024

05.06.2026 Present:

Ms. Shreya Chauhan, Advocate, for the applicant.

Mr. Yuyutsu Singh Thakur, Advocate, for the respondents No.1 to 3 and 6.

OMP(M) No.151 of 2024

The present application has been filed for condonation of delay in filing the present appeal. It has been averred that the impugned judgment was passed by learned District Judge on 04.09.2023. Learned counsel for the applicant has applied for certified copy of impugned judgment on 06.09.2023 and the same was delivered on 07.10.2023. However, the disposal of the case was not within the knowledge of the applicant as the same was never intimated to the applicant by its counsel. Earlier also, due to inefficiency and lackadaisical attitude of the said law firm, namely, M/s M.V. Kini & Co., as many as 362 cases pending in District Mandi/Bilaspur were withdrawn from the law firm and allotted to M/s Nishaank Mattoo & Associates. Therefore, it has been prayed that the delay in filing the appeal is neither intentional nor willful, but the same has occurred due to unavoidable circumstances.

Notices of the application were sent to the respondents. Mr.Yuyutsu Thakur, Advocate, has put in appearance for respondents No.1 to 3 and 6. Respondents No.4 and 5 stands duly served, but none has put in appearance

on their behalf. Hence, the said respondents are proceeded against ex parte.

Learned counsel for the appearing non-applicants has no objection in case the application is allowed.

Consequently, in view of the averments as made in the application, which is duly supported by an affidavit and in view of submissions as made by learned counsel for the applicant, the present application is allowed and delay in filing the appeal is condoned.

Accordingly, the application stands disposed of.

Arb. Appeal No._______ of 2026

Appeal be registered.

Heard.

Admit .

Issue post admission notice to respondents No.4 and 5, returnable within four weeks, on taking steps within three days.

List thereafter. In the meantime, records be requisitioned.

OMPST No.39341 of 2024

Be registered. Heard

Subject to deposit of entire awarded amount along with up-to-date interest by the appellant/applicant within a period of eight weeks from today, the operation, implementation and execution of impugned judgment dated 04.09.2023, as

passed by learned District Judge, Bilaspur as well as arbitral award dated 05.09.2017 during the pendency of appeal is ordered to be stayed.

Application stands disposed of.

( Romesh Verma ) Judge

June 05, 2026 (vt)