Remanded

NHAI v. Tulsi Ram (through LRs)

Himachal Pradesh HC15 Sept 2026OMPM/250/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This court held that an award passed against a deceased person without joining their legal representatives is a nullity. Following Supreme Court precedent, the court set aside the award and remanded the matter for fresh disposal after correctly impleading representatives.

What did the court decide?

Set aside the award dated 03.09.2022; remand matter to District Judge, Bilaspur for fresh disposal; direct parties to appear before MACT on 29 September 2026.

NHAI Vs Tulsi Ram (through LRs) — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Himachal Pradesh HC (2026)

¶1

2026:HHC:39406

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA

¶3

OMP (M) No.	: 81 of 2023
Decided on	: 15.09.2026
National Highways Authority of India	.....Appellant
Versus
Tulsi Ram (deceased)
through LRs & Others ....	.Respondents

¶4

Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Virender Singh, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?

¶5

For the applicant :	Ms. Ritu Sha	rm	a, Advocate.
For the respondent :	Mr. Piyush vice Mr. A	Bh mit	ardwaj, Advocate Singh Chandel,
	Advocate, for 1(ii), and 2.	res	pondents No.1(i),
	Respondent	No	.3, is stated to
	have expired.

¶6

Virender Singh, Judge (Oral)

¶7

ApplicantNational Highways Authority of India has preferred the accompanying appeal against the award dated 03.09.2022, passed by the Court of learned District Judge Bilaspur, District Bilaspur, H.P. in Case No.26 of 2018, titled as ‘National Highways Authority of India versus Tulsi Ram (deceased) through LRs & Others’.

¶8

2026:HHC:39406

¶9

¶10

Since, the appeal is barred by limitation, as such, the present application has been filed for condonation of delay. 3. Respondent No.3, is stated to have expired. As per the contents of the applications, bearing OMP(M) Nos.250 and 251 of 2024, respondentDina Nath expired on 05.01.2019. In order to demonstrate the said fact, death certificate of Shri Dina Nath issued by the competent authority has been annexed.

¶11

On 05.01.2019, the lis was pending before the learned District Judge, Bilaspur. Meaning thereby, the award has been passed against a dead person, as, no efforts have been made by the applicantappellant to bring on record the legal representatives of respondentDina Nath.

¶12

Since, the death had taken place, when the lis was pending, before the learned District Judge, as such, the award passed by the learned District Judge, Bilaspur, for or against a dead person is nullity.

¶13

My this view is being guided by the decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court in ‘Gurnam Singh (Dead) through Legal Representatives & Ors. Vs. Gurbachan Kaur (Dead) by Legal Representatives’ (2017) 13 SCC 414 . It is apt to reproduce para 21 of the judgment, as under:

¶14

2026:HHC:39406

¶15

¶16

“It is a fundamental principle of law laid down by this Court in Kiran Singh’s case (supra) that a decree passed by the Court, if it is a nullity, its validity can be questioned in any proceeding including in execution proceedings or even in collateral proceedings whenever such decree is sought to be enforced by the decree holder. The reason is that the defect of this nature affects the very authority of the Court in passing such decree and goes to the root of the case. This principle, in our considered opinion, squarely applies to this case because it is a settled principle of law that the decree passed by a Court for or against a dead person is a ‘nullity’.”

¶17

In view of the above, this Court is left with no option, but, to set aside the award passed by the learned District Judge, Bilaspur and to remand the matters back to the learned District Judge, Bilaspur, for fresh disposal, in accordance with law, after bringing on record the legal representatives of the respondent No.3Dina Nath.

¶18

Since, the lis was pending from the year 2011, as such, it is expected from the learned District Judge to decide the matter, within a period of four months.

¶19

With these observations, the awards dated 03.09.2022, passed by the learned District Judge, are set aside.

¶20

Parties, through their counsel, are directed to appear, before the learned MACT, on 29^th September, 2026 .

¶21

2026:HHC:39406

¶22

¶23

All pending miscellaneous applications shall also

¶24

stand disposed of.

¶25

Record be sent back, immediately.

¶26

( Virender Singh )

¶27

Judge

¶28

September 15, 2026 ( ps )

NHAI v. Tulsi Ram (through LRs)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

NHAI v. Tulsi Ram (through LRs)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases