Sri Karunagaran S Ganesh Vs the Project Director

THE PROJECT DIRECTOR, NATIONAL HIGHWAY AUTHORITY OF INDIA, PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION UNIT BENGALURU, SY.NO.13, 14^TH K.M.NAGASANDRA, BENGALURU - TUMUKUR ROAD (NH-4) BENGALURU – 560 073.

¶17

THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER NATIONAL HIGHWAYS AUTHORITY OF INDIA NO.678/3, NEERUBHAVI KEMPANNA LAYOUT, HEBBAL BENGALURU – 560 024.

¶18

2 -

¶19

NC: 2025:KHC:30967-DB MFA No. 495 of 2025

¶20

HC-KAR

¶21

THE ARBITRATOR AND DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, OFFICE AT DEVANAHALLI (BIRASANDRA VILLAGE) BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT DEVANAHALLI – 562 110.

¶22

…RESPONDENTS

¶23

THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 37(1)(c) OF THE ARBITRATION AND CONCILIATION ACT, AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 14.10.2024 PASSED IN AP.NO.194/2022 ON THE FILE OF THE PRL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT, BENGALURU, PARTLY ALLOWING THE PETITION FILED UNDER SECTION 34(2) OF THE ARBITRATION AND CONCILIATION ACT 1996 R/W SECTION 3-G(6) OF NATIONAL HIGHWAYS ACT, 1956.

¶24

THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, CHIEF JUSTICE DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶25

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. VIBHU BAKHRU ,CHIEF JUSTICE and HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C M JOSHI

¶26

ORAL JUDGMENT

¶27

(PER: HON'BLE MR. VIBHU BAKHRU,CHIEF JUSTICE)

¶28

The appellant has filed the present appeal under Section 37(1)(c) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act,

¶29

3 - NC: 2025:KHC:30967-DB MFA No. 495 of 2025

¶30

HC-KAR

¶31

1996 [the A&C Act], impugning an order dated 14.10.2024 passed by the Learned Commercial Court [the Principal District Judge, Bengaluru Rural District, Bengaluru] in Arbitration Petition No.194 of 2022.

¶32

The respondent [NHAI] had filed the aforementioned petition [A.P.No.194/2022] impugning an arbitral award dated 07.05.2022 passed by the Deputy Commissioner [respondent No.2].

¶33

The appellant had raised a dispute before the learned Arbitrator regarding the compensation payable in respect of the acquisition of dry land measuring 1290 sq.mtrs. [comprising in Sy.No.131/1] and dry and garden land measuring 2390 sq. mtrs. [comprising in Sy.No.131/2]. The said lands were acquired in terms of an award dated 28.06.2008.

¶34

Thereafter, garden land measuring 1660 sq.mtrs. comprising in Survey No.131/1 was acquired in terms of an award dated 06.02.2009 [the second acquisition].

¶35

4 - NC: 2025:KHC:30967-DB MFA No. 495 of 2025

¶36

HC-KAR

¶37

Subsequently, additional dry land measuring 290 sq. mtrs. comprising in Sy.No.131/1 and garden land measuring 600 sq. mtrs. comprising in Sy.No.131/2 were acquired in terms of an award passed on 29.09.2010 [the third acquisition].

¶38

The notification of awards in respect of the second and third acquisition were issued after the reference for enhancement of compensation of land acquired comprised in first acquisition was taken up by the Arbitrator. The appellant being in bonafide belief that enhanced compensation in respect of subsequent acquisitions cold also be claimed before the learned arbitrator in the pending arbitral proceedings, agitated the same before the learned Arbitrator. The learned Arbitrator, thereafter proceeded to enhance the compensation awarded in respect of the lands acquired under all the three acquisitions.

¶39

5 - NC: 2025:KHC:30967-DB MFA No. 495 of 2025

¶40

HC-KAR

¶41

The learned Commercial Court has rightly faulted the arbitral award dated 07.05.2022, as corrected by an award dated 12.07.2022, under Section 34 of the A&C Act, on the ground that the Arbitral Tribunal had proceeded to adjudicate disputes that were beyond the reference. We find no infirmity with the said view. The reference to the learned Arbitral Tribunal was confined to enhancement of compensation for land acquired in terms of an award dated 28.06.2008.

¶42

The learned counsel appearing for the appellant submits that the appellant will take fresh steps referring the dispute pertaining to the second and third acquisition to arbitration and prays for liberty to do so.

¶43

The present appeal is disposed of with the aforesaid liberty. The appellant is also not precluded from filing an application under Section 14 of the Limitation Act, 1963 for seeking condonation of delay till the date of this order, as, undisputedly, his pursuit of remedies is bonafide.

¶44