[Cites 16, Cited by 0]
Bombay High Court
National Highways Authority Of India ... vs Shaikh Imran Karim And Another on 7 April, 2026
2026:BHC-AUG:14652
1
113.25Appeal+
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
ARBITRATION APPEAL NO.113 of 2025
National Highways Authority of India,
Through its Project Director,
Amrish Manik Mankar,
Age-49 years, Occ-Service,
Office at Project Implementation Unit,
At 2nd Floor Jal Bhavan,
Administrative Building, Maharashtra Jivan Pradhikaran,
Near Devgiri College ITI Road, Vedant Nagar,
Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar-431 005.
.. APPELLANT
VERSUS
1] Digambar Hiwale
Age-Major, Occupation-Agriculturist,
R/o.At Post Deolai Tq. & Dist. Aurangabad.
2] Competent Authority Land Acquisition,
2nd Floor Jal Bhavan, Administrative Building,
Maharashtra Jivan Pradhikaran,
Near Devgiri College ITI Road, Vedant Nagar,
Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar-431 005.
.. RESPONDENTS
AND
ARBITRATION APPEAL NO.33 of 2026
National Highways Authority of India,
Through its Project Director,
Amrish Manik Mankar,
Age-49 years, Occ-Service,
Office at Project Implementation Unit,
At 2nd Floor Jal Bhavan,
Administrative Building, Maharashtra Jivan Pradhikaran,
Near Devgiri College ITI Road, Vedant Nagar,
Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar-431 005.
2
113.25Appeal+
.. APPELLANT
VERSUS
1] Shaikh Rasul Shaikh Chotu,
Age-Major, Occupation - Agriculturist
R/o. At Post Deolai, Tq. & Dist. Aurangabad.
2] Shaikh Shabbir Chotu
Age-Major, Occupation-Agriculturist,
R/o. At Post Deolai, Tq. & Dist. Aurangabad.
3] Competent Authority Land Acquisition,
2nd Floor Jal Bhavan, Administrative Building,
Maharashtra Jivan Pradhikaran,
Near Devgiri College ITI Road, Vedant Nagar,
Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar-431 005.
.. RESPONDENTS
AND
ARBITRATION APPEAL NO.36 of 2026
National Highways Authority of India,
Through its Project Director,
Amrish Manik Mankar,
Age-49 years, Occ-Service,
Office at Project Implementation Unit,
At 2nd Floor Jal Bhavan,
Administrative Building, Maharashtra Jivan Pradhikaran,
Near Devgiri College ITI Road, Vedant Nagar,
Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar-431 005.
.. APPELLANT
VERSUS
1] Shaikh Ismail Shaikh Usman,
Age-Major, Occupation - Agriculturist,
R/o. At Post Deolai, Tq. & Dist. Aurangabad.
2] Competent Authority Land Acquisition,
2nd Floor Jal Bhavan, Administrative Building,
Maharashtra Jivan Pradhikaran,
3
113.25Appeal+
Near Devgiri College ITI Road, Vedant Nagar,
Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar-431 005.
.. RESPONDENTS
AND
ARBITRATION APPEAL NO.37 of 2026
National Highways Authority of India,
Through its Project Director,
Amrish Manik Mankar,
Age-49 years, Occ-Service,
Office at Project Implementation Unit,
At 2nd Floor Jal Bhavan,
Administrative Building, Maharashtra Jivan Pradhikaran,
Near Devgiri College ITI Road, Vedant Nagar,
Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar-431 005.
.. APPELLANT
VERSUS
1] Shaikh Ismail Shaikh Shahanoor,
Age-Major, Occupation-Agriculturist,
R/o.At Post Deolai Tq. & Dist. Aurangabad.
2] Shaikh Hasan Shaikh Shahanoor
Age-Major, Occupation - Agriculturist,
R/o. As above.
3] Shaikh Ibrahim Shaikh Shahanoor,
Age-Major, Occupation - Agriculturist,
R/o. As above.
4] Shaikh Husain Shaikh Shahanoor,
Age-Major, Occupation-Agriculturist,
R/o. As above.
5] Competent Authority Land Acquisition,
2nd Floor Jal Bhavan, Administrative Building,
Maharashtra Jivan Pradhikaran,
Near Devgiri College ITI Road, Vedant Nagar,
Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar-431 005.
4
113.25Appeal+
.. RESPONDENTS
AND
ARBITRATION APPEAL NO.147 of 2025
National Highways Authority of India,
Through its Project Director,
Amrish Manik Mankar,
Age-49 years, Occ-Service,
Office at Project Implementation Unit,
At 2nd Floor Jal Bhavan,
Administrative Building, Maharashtra Jivan Pradhikaran,
Near Devgiri College ITI Road, Vedant Nagar,
Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar-431 005.
.. APPELLANT
VERSUS
1] Ammir Habib,
Age-Major, Occupation-Agriculturist,
R/o.At Post Deolai Tq. & Dist. Aurangabad.
2] Competent Authority Land Acquisition,
2nd Floor Jal Bhavan, Administrative Building,
Maharashtra Jivan Pradhikaran,
Near Devgiri College ITI Road, Vedant Nagar,
Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar-431 005.
.. RESPONDENTS
AND
ARBITRATION APPEAL NO.35 of 2026
National Highways Authority of India,
Through its Project Director,
Amrish Manik Mankar,
Age-49 years, Occ-Service,
Office at Project Implementation Unit,
At 2nd Floor Jal Bhavan,
Administrative Building, Maharashtra Jivan Pradhikaran,
Near Devgiri College ITI Road, Vedant Nagar,
5
113.25Appeal+
Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar-431 005.
.. APPELLANT
VERSUS
1] Shaikh Irfan Karim
Age-Major, Occupation-Agriculturist,
R/o.At Post Deolai Tq. & Dist. Aurangabad.
2] Competent Authority Land Acquisition,
2nd Floor Jal Bhavan, Administrative Building,
Maharashtra Jivan Pradhikaran,
Near Devgiri College ITI Road, Vedant Nagar,
Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar-431 005.
.. RESPONDENTS
AND
ARBITRATION APPEAL NO.52 of 2026
National Highways Authority of India,
Through its Project Director,
Amrish Manik Mankar,
Age-49 years, Occ-Service,
Office at Project Implementation Unit,
At 2nd Floor Jal Bhavan,
Administrative Building, Maharashtra Jivan Pradhikaran,
Near Devgiri College ITI Road, Vedant Nagar,
Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar-431 005.
.. APPELLANT
VERSUS
1] Shaikh Imran Karim,
Age-Major, Occupation-Agriculturist,
R/o.At Post Deolai Tq. & Dist. Aurangabad.
2] Competent Authority Land Acquisition,
2nd Floor Jal Bhavan, Administrative Building,
Maharashtra Jivan Pradhikaran,
Near Devgiri College ITI Road, Vedant Nagar,
Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar-431 005.
.. RESPONDENTS
6
113.25Appeal+
AND
ARBITRATION APPEAL NO.118 of 2025
National Highways Authority of India,
Through its Project Director,
Amrish Manik Mankar,
Age-49 years, Occ-Service,
Office at Project Implementation Unit,
At 2nd Floor Jal Bhavan,
Administrative Building, Maharashtra Jivan Pradhikaran,
Near Devgiri College ITI Road, Vedant Nagar,
Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar-431 005.
.. APPELLANT
VERSUS
1] Ravsaheb Hiwale,
Age-Major, Occupation-Agriculturist,
R/o.At Post Deolai Tq. & Dist. Aurangabad.
2] Amol Hiwale,
Age-Major, Occupation-Agriculturist,
R/o. As above.
3] Digambar Hiwale,
Age-Major, Occupation - Agriculturist,
R/o. As above.
4] Shaikh Husain Shaikh Shahanoor,
Age-Major, Occupation-Agriculturist,
R/o. As above.
5] Competent Authority Land Acquisition,
2nd Floor Jal Bhavan, Administrative Building,
Maharashtra Jivan Pradhikaran,
Near Devgiri College ITI Road, Vedant Nagar,
Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar-431 005.
.. RESPONDENTS
7
113.25Appeal+
AND
ARBITRATION APPEAL NO.117 of 2025
National Highways Authority of India,
Through its Project Director,
Amrish Manik Mankar,
Age-49 years, Occ-Service,
Office at Project Implementation Unit,
At 2nd Floor Jal Bhavan,
Administrative Building, Maharashtra Jivan Pradhikaran,
Near Devgiri College ITI Road, Vedant Nagar,
Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar-431 005.
.. APPELLANT
VERSUS
1] Shaikh Dada Shaikh Behalim
Age-Major, Occupation-Agriculturist,
R/o.At Post Deolai Tq. & Dist. Aurangabad.
2] Competent Authority Land Acquisition,
2nd Floor Jal Bhavan, Administrative Building,
Maharashtra Jivan Pradhikaran,
Near Devgiri College ITI Road, Vedant Nagar,
Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar-431 005.
.. RESPONDENTS
AND
ARBITRATION APPEAL NO.122 of 2025
National Highways Authority of India,
Through its Project Director,
Amrish Manik Mankar,
Age-49 years, Occ-Service,
Office at Project Implementation Unit,
At 2nd Floor Jal Bhavan,
Administrative Building, Maharashtra Jivan Pradhikaran,
Near Devgiri College ITI Road, Vedant Nagar,
Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar-431 005.
.. APPELLANT
VERSUS
8
113.25Appeal+
1] Shaikh Nawaj Shaikh Maheboob,
Age-Major, Occupation-Agriculturist,
R/o.At Post Deolai Tq. & Dist. Aurangabad.
2] Competent Authority Land Acquisition,
2nd Floor Jal Bhavan, Administrative Building,
Maharashtra Jivan Pradhikaran,
Near Devgiri College ITI Road, Vedant Nagar,
Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar-431 005.
.. RESPONDENTS
AND
ARBITRATION APPEAL NO.143 of 2025
National Highways Authority of India,
Through its Project Director,
Amrish Manik Mankar,
Age-49 years, Occ-Service,
Office at Project Implementation Unit,
At 2nd Floor Jal Bhavan,
Administrative Building, Maharashtra Jivan Pradhikaran,
Near Devgiri College ITI Road, Vedant Nagar,
Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar-431 005.
.. APPELLANT
VERSUS
1] Sattar Gulab,
Age-Major, Occupation-Agriculturist,
R/o.At Post Deolai Tq. & Dist. Aurangabad.
2] Competent Authority Land Acquisition,
2nd Floor Jal Bhavan, Administrative Building,
Maharashtra Jivan Pradhikaran,
Near Devgiri College ITI Road, Vedant Nagar,
Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar-431 005.
.. RESPONDENTS
AND
9
113.25Appeal+
ARBITRATION APPEAL NO.54 of 2026
National Highways Authority of India,
Through its Project Director,
Amrish Manik Mankar,
Age-49 years, Occ-Service,
Office at Project Implementation Unit,
At 2nd Floor Jal Bhavan,
Administrative Building, Maharashtra Jivan Pradhikaran,
Near Devgiri College ITI Road, Vedant Nagar,
Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar-431 005.
.. APPELLANT
VERSUS
1] Mohammad Ishaq Gulab Patel
Age-Major, Occupation-Agriculturist,
R/o.At Post Deolai Tq. & Dist. Aurangabad.
2] Competent Authority Land Acquisition,
2nd Floor Jal Bhavan, Administrative Building,
Maharashtra Jivan Pradhikaran,
Near Devgiri College ITI Road, Vedant Nagar,
Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar-431 005.
.. RESPONDENTS
AND
ARBITRATION APPEAL NO.34 of 2026
National Highways Authority of India,
Through its Project Director,
Amrish Manik Mankar,
Age-49 years, Occ-Service,
Office at Project Implementation Unit,
At 2nd Floor Jal Bhavan,
Administrative Building, Maharashtra Jivan Pradhikaran,
Near Devgiri College ITI Road, Vedant Nagar,
Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar-431 005.
.. APPELLANT
VERSUS
10
113.25Appeal+
1] Sharifabi Shaikh Amin,
Age-Major, Occupation-Agriculturist,
R/o.At Post Deolai Tq. & Dist. Aurangabad.
2] Akhtarbi Shaikh Allabaksh,
Age-Major, Occupation - Agriculturist,
R/o. At Post Deolai, Tq. & Dist. Aurangabad.
3] Salima Shaikh Munir,
Age-Major, Occupation - Agriculturist,
R/o. At Post Deolai, Tq. & Dist. Aurangabad.
4] Competent Authority Land Acquisition,
2nd Floor Jal Bhavan, Administrative Building,
Maharashtra Jivan Pradhikaran,
Near Devgiri College ITI Road, Vedant Nagar,
Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar-431 005.
.. RESPONDENTS
AND
ARBITRATION APPEAL NO.148 of 2025
National Highways Authority of India,
Through its Project Director,
Amrish Manik Mankar,
Age-49 years, Occ-Service,
Office at Project Implementation Unit,
At 2nd Floor Jal Bhavan,
Administrative Building, Maharashtra Jivan Pradhikaran,
Near Devgiri College ITI Road, Vedant Nagar,
Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar-431 005.
.. APPELLANT
VERSUS
1] Feyyaz Khan Ahemad Khan,
Age-Major, Occupation-Agriculturist,
R/o.At Post Deolai Tq. & Dist. Aurangabad.
2] Competent Authority Land Acquisition,
2nd Floor Jal Bhavan, Administrative Building,
11
113.25Appeal+
Maharashtra Jivan Pradhikaran,
Near Devgiri College ITI Road, Vedant Nagar,
Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar-431 005.
.. RESPONDENTS
AND
ARBITRATION APPEAL NO.119 of 2025
National Highways Authority of India,
Through its Project Director,
Amrish Manik Mankar,
Age-49 years, Occ-Service,
Office at Project Implementation Unit,
At 2nd Floor Jal Bhavan,
Administrative Building, Maharashtra Jivan Pradhikaran,
Near Devgiri College ITI Road, Vedant Nagar,
Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar-431 005.
.. APPELLANT
VERSUS
1] Ravsaheb Hiwale,
Age-Major, Occupation-Agriculturist,
R/o.At Post Deolai Tq. & Dist. Aurangabad.
2] Competent Authority Land Acquisition,
2nd Floor Jal Bhavan, Administrative Building,
Maharashtra Jivan Pradhikaran,
Near Devgiri College ITI Road, Vedant Nagar,
Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar-431 005.
.. RESPONDENTS
AND
ARBITRATION APPEAL NO. 120 of 2025
National Highways Authority of India,
Through its Project Director,
Amrish Manik Mankar,
Age-49 years, Occ-Service,
Office at Project Implementation Unit,
At 2nd Floor Jal Bhavan,
12
113.25Appeal+
Administrative Building, Maharashtra Jivan Pradhikaran,
Near Devgiri College ITI Road, Vedant Nagar,
Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar-431 005.
.. APPELLANT
VERSUS
1] Ravsaheb Hiwale
Age-Major, Occupation-Agriculturist,
R/o.At Post Deolai Tq. & Dist. Aurangabad.
2] Competent Authority Land Acquisition,
2nd Floor Jal Bhavan, Administrative Building,
Maharashtra Jivan Pradhikaran,
Near Devgiri College ITI Road, Vedant Nagar,
Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar-431 005.
.. RESPONDENTS
AND
ARBITRATION APPEAL NO.145 of 2025
National Highways Authority of India,
Through its Project Director,
Amrish Manik Mankar,
Age-49 years, Occ-Service,
Office at Project Implementation Unit,
At 2nd Floor Jal Bhavan,
Administrative Building, Maharashtra Jivan Pradhikaran,
Near Devgiri College ITI Road, Vedant Nagar,
Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar-431 005.
.. APPELLANT
VERSUS
1] Shaikh Ismail Shaikh Shahanoor,
Age-Major, Occupation-Agriculturist,
R/o.At Post Deolai Tq. & Dist. Aurangabad.
2] Shaikh Hasan Shaikh Shahanoor,
Age-Major, Occupation-Agriculturist,
R/o. As above.
13
113.25Appeal+
3] Shaikh Ibrahim Shaikh Shahanoor,
Age-Major, Occupation-Agriculturist,
R/o. As above.
4] Shaikh Husain Shaikh Shahanoor,
Age-Major, Occupation-Agriculturist,
R/o. As above.
5] Competent Authority Land Acquisition,
2nd Floor Jal Bhavan, Administrative Building,
Maharashtra Jivan Pradhikaran,
Near Devgiri College ITI Road, Vedant Nagar,
Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar-431 005.
.. RESPONDENTS
AND
ARBITRATION APPEAL NO.42 of 2026
National Highways Authority of India,
Through its Project Director,
Amrish Manik Mankar,
Age-49 years, Occ-Service,
Office at Project Implementation Unit,
At 2nd Floor Jal Bhavan,
Administrative Building, Maharashtra Jivan Pradhikaran,
Near Devgiri College ITI Road, Vedant Nagar,
Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar-431 005.
.. APPELLANT
VERSUS
1] Vasundhara Kisanrao Kudmulvar,
Age-Major, Occupation-Agriculturist,
R/o.At Post Deolai Tq. & Dist. Aurangabad.
2] Competent Authority Land Acquisition,
2nd Floor Jal Bhavan, Administrative Building,
Maharashtra Jivan Pradhikaran,
Near Devgiri College ITI Road, Vedant Nagar,
Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar-431 005.
.. RESPONDENTS
14
113.25Appeal+
AND
ARBITRATION APPEAL NO.121 of 2025
National Highways Authority of India,
Through its Project Director,
Amrish Manik Mankar,
Age-49 years, Occ-Service,
Office at Project Implementation Unit,
At 2nd Floor Jal Bhavan,
Administrative Building, Maharashtra Jivan Pradhikaran,
Near Devgiri College ITI Road, Vedant Nagar,
Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar-431 005.
.. APPELLANT
VERSUS
1] Shaikh Taru Shaikh Hasan,
Age-Major, Occupation-Agriculturist,
R/o.At Post Deolai Tq. & Dist. Aurangabad.
2] Competent Authority Land Acquisition,
2nd Floor Jal Bhavan, Administrative Building,
Maharashtra Jivan Pradhikaran,
Near Devgiri College ITI Road, Vedant Nagar,
Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar-431 005.
.. RESPONDENTS
...
Mr.S.J.Rahate, Advocate for the appellants
Mr.R.M.Patil, Advocate a/w. Mr.P.H.Patil, Advocate for the
respondent no.1.
Mr.A.G.Talhar, D.S.G.I. a/w. Mr.S.S.Deve, Mr.U.B.Bondar,
Mr.R.S.Sarvadnya, Mr.R.B.Bagul, Mr.R.D.Sanap, Mr.S.W.
Munde, Mr.N.T.Tribhuwan, Mr.N.U.Yadav, Mr.N.S.Salunke,
Mr.R.R.Bangar, Mr.N.T.Bhagat, Mr.K.S.Solanke, Advocates
for the respondent- CALA
...
15
113.25Appeal+
CORAM : ARUN R. PEDNEKER, J.
DATE : 07.04.2026
JUDGMENT :
1] By the present Arbitration Appeals, the National
Highway Authority of India [NHAI] challenges the order
passed by the Principal District Judge, Aurangabad under
Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996,
dismissing the appellants' applications, to set aside the
award passed by the Arbitrator, granting compensation to
the claimants @ Rs.7966/- per sq. mtrs. to the lands
acquired from village Deolai, Taluka and District
Aurangabad [Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar].
Brief facts leading to filing the present Appeals
are as under :
2] The lands of the respondents - land owners
situated at village Deolai were acquired for widening of
National Highway-211 and the preliminary Notification for
acquisition under Section 3-A (1) of the National Highways
Act, 1956 [for short 'Act of 1956'] was issued on
113.25Appeal+
18.09.2025. The Competent Authority passed award in
respect of acquisition of the lands from more than 23
villages for National Highway-211.
3] The CALA passed first Award on 15.07.2017 in
respect of the lands in village Deolai granting compensation
@ Rs.7966/- per sq. meter for small lands and for large
lands at lesser rates after making deductions.
4] The CALA passed second Award for the same
lands of village Deolai on 28.07.2017 giving different rates
of compensation, considering three different categories of
the land @ Rs.4966/- per sq.mtrs., Rs.5000/- per sq. mtrs.
and Rs.5500/- per sq. mtrs. Since the second award was
passed for the same lands, the second award dated
28.07.2017 was challenged before this Court in various Writ
Petitions. This Court, by order dated 26.08.2021 in Writ
Petition Nos.12279/2019 along with connected Writ
Petitions, set aside the second award dated 28.07.2017 of
CALA in respect of the same lands of Deolai for which the
first award was already passed. The second award of CALA
113.25Appeal+
was set-aside by this Court, being without jurisdiction.
5] The appellant-NHAI, thereafter, invoked
Reference for arbitration under Section 3-G (5) of the Act of
1956 on 24.01.2022, assailing the first award dated
15.07.2017. The possession of the lands have been taken in
2016. There was no deposit made in terms of Section 3-H
(1) & (2) of the Act of 1956 in terms of first award dated
15.07.2017, however, the amounts were paid in terms of
second award. The Arbitrator passed an award on
19.01.2024 and dismissed the applications filed by the
NHAI challenging the award of CALA dated 15.07.2017.
The NHAI thereafter filed application under Section 34 of
the Arbitration and Conciliation Act before the District
Court, challenging the arbitral award dated 19.01.2024.
6] The District Court by order dated
15.11.2025 dismissed the application filed by NHAI under
Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act and
maintained the arbitral award dated 19.01.2024. By the
present Appeals, the appellant - NHAI has challenged the
113.25Appeal+
Arbitral Award dated 19.01.2024 passed by the Collector
and Arbitrator, Aurangabad, so also, the order dated
15.11.2025 passed by the District Court under Section 34 of
the Arbitration and Conciliation Act.
SUBMISSIONS :
7] It is contended by the learned counsel
Mr.Satyajeet J.Rahate for the appellant - NHAI that in all
91 sale deeds were received from the office of Sub-
Registrar, Aurangabad. The CALA had called for the sale
deeds of last three years i.e. 2012 to 2015 from the office of
Sub-Registrar, Aurangabad. Out of 91 sale deeds, the CALA
has selected 43 sale deeds from group-II land. Thereafter,
the CALA, out of 43 sale deeds, had taken in all 22 sale
deeds of Group-II land and proceeded to determine the
compensation @ Rs.7966/- per sq. mtrs. However, the
CALA, while passing second award dated 28.07.2017, had
specifically rejected 10 sale deeds, which were abutting to
the Highways. It is also submitted that the ready-reckoner
was required to be called while making award by the CALA.
113.25Appeal+
8] It is submitted that the Arbitrator so also the
District Judge failed to appreciate that the CALA has relied
upon the sale-deeds of the land, situated adjacent to Dhule-
Solapur National Highway-211. It is stated that the lands
are not situated at Dhule-Solapur, National Highway-211,
because it was yet to be constructed. It is also stated that
the CALA had failed to consider the sale deeds of gut
numbers from where the lands has been acquired and
comparable sale deeds of similar lands are required to be
taken into consideration.
9] It is further submitted that the Principal District
Judge has erred in recording the findings that the appellant
- NHAI has not challenged the compensation awarded @
Rs.13,656/- per sq. mtrs. to the proximate location of
villages Deolai and Satara. The Principal District Judge has
failed to consider the matter on merits and failed to
consider that the award is not just and fair.
10] It is further stated that the complaints were
made on 18.06.2018, 29.10.2018, 19.02.2019, 01.09.2020
113.25Appeal+
by the various persons against CALA, who had passed the
award for village Satara and also of Deolai. The CALA had
illegally prepared forged and fabricated documents for his
personal benefits.
11] The learned Advocate for the appellant - NHAI
has given long written submissions raising grounds
primarily relating to the conduct of Arbitrator and not
granting NHAI fair hearing in the matter. The primary
contention of the appellant - NHAI is that the Arbitrator did
not act fairly and did not give an opportunity of hearing to
the appellant-NHAI to lead evidence and that the various
applications filed before the Arbitrator for amendment of
pleading, for stay and other applications were not decided
by the Arbitrator and the Arbitrator has proceeded to decide
the matter on merits without considering the supporting
documents and affidavit filed by the appellant - NHAI. Thus,
the prayer is made to set aside the arbitral award dated
19.01.2024 and remand the matter back to the Arbitrator.
12] Per contra, the learned counsel Mr.R.M.Patil for
113.25Appeal+
the respondent no. 1 submits that the First Award was
passed on 15.07.2017 and the same was not challenged.
Subsequently, second award was passed on 28.07.2017 for
the same lands and thus the said second award was set
aside by the High Court. Thereafter the First Award dated
15.07.2017 of CALA was challenged before the Arbitrator
by filing Reference under Section 3-G (5) of the Act of
1956. The appellant NHAI had failed to deposit an amount
as required under Section 3-H (1) and (2) of the Act of
1956. The arbitration application was filed on 24.01.2022
and the date of filing evidence was given to both the parties
between 02.08.2023 till 14.08.2023. However, the
appellant NHAI filed affidavit in evidence but failed to file
the documents in support of the evidence. The claimants
had filed its evidence.
13] The Arbitrator on the basis of evidence led by
the claimants found that the price granted by CALA is less
than the market value but did not enhance the same as
there was no independent challenge to the award of CALA
113.25Appeal+
by the claimants under Section 3-G (5) of the Act of 1956.
After the award was passed on 19.01.2024, the NHAI
submitted documents by e-mail on 22.01.2024 i.e. two
years after filing of the arbitration application. The learned
counsel for the respondent no.1 has placed on record letter
of Arbitrator and pointed out that the Arbitrator had written
a letter to the Project Officer stating that the various
opportunities were granted to lead the evidence, however,
the Advocate of the NHAI has failed to lead the evidence
and as such on 12.10.2023 request was also made that the
affidavits be filed.
14] It is pointed out that although some of the
awards passed in respect of village Satara wherein
compensation @ Rs.21,000/- per sq. mtrs. was granted was
challenged before the District Judge, the same were
compromised by NHAI, wherein the claimants have given
up only one year interest on the award amount.
15] He also pointed out that for matters arising
from Satara before the Arbitrator, the NHAI has not even
113.25Appeal+
led any evidence and directly proceeded for written
argument and the award. Although the allegations are made
in respect of corruption in determining the price of the
lands for village Satara, the NHAI has not challenged the
same. He further submits that for large number of matters
in Satara village compensation is granted @ Rs.13,656/- per
sq. mtrs. and the same are not challenged by the NHAI. He
further submits that in the instant case the appellant NHAI
had failed to lead the evidence despite several opportunities
were granted to the appellant and as such the appellant had
deliberately delayed the matter before the Arbitrator. It is
submitted that the compensation granted is reasonable, as
such, the award of Arbitrator confirming the award of CALA
and the order passed by the District Court is just and
proper.
CONSIDERATION :
16] Having considered the rival submissions, the
few facts are required to be noted. Though the CALA has
granted compensation at the basic valuation of Rs.7,966/-
113.25Appeal+
per sq. mtrs., the CALA has reduced the said rate by
creating slabs of the total area of the same land into five
categories for compensation as under :
Upto 500 501 to 2000 2001 to 4000 4001 to Above 10000
sq.m. sq.m. sq.m. 10000 sq.m. sq. mr.
Rs.7,966/- Rs.7,169/- Rs.6,373/- Rs.4,780/- Rs.3,983/-
Depending on the total area of land owner, the
compensation @ Rs.7,966/- per sq. mtrs. is granted only up
to 500 square meter of the acquired land. Beyond 500
square meter, there are slabs of different rates and they get
lower as the area of land increases. The CALA has taken 22
sale deeds into consideration and in award dated
15.07.2017, has observed as under:
भुमी संपादन, पुनर्वसन व पुनर्स्थापन करताना वाजवी भरपाई
मिळण्याच्या व पारदर्शकतेचा हक्क अधिनियम 2013 नुसार
जमीनीचे मुल्यांकन निश्चीत करण्यात आलेले आहे . कलम
3A ची प्रसिध्दीची अंतिम तारीख ग्राहय धरण्यात आली
आहे. जमिनीचे मूल्यांकन नविन अधिनियमानुसार निश्चित
करण्यात येत आहे. मौजे देवळाई येथील खरेदी विक्री पैकी
ग्रुप 2 चे 43 व्यवहार पैकी निम्मे 22 खरेदी विक्री व्यवहार
संपादित जमिनीचे मूल्यांकन ठरवितांना विचारात घेण्यात
आले आहे.
17] On 28.07.2017, without repudiating or
canceling the above Award dated 15.07.2017, the CALA
113.25Appeal+
declared second award in respect of same lands covered
under the first award and determined the compensation @
Rs.4,996/- per sq. mtrs., Rs.5000/- per sq. mtrs. and
Rs.5,500/- per sq. mtrs. into three different categories and
the Second Award of the CALA was set aside by the High
Court in Writ Petition No.14710/2019 along with connected
matters.
18] The NHAI had thereafter challenged the price
determination by CALA by Award dated 15.07.2017 by
filing an application dated 08.06.2020 under Section 3-G
(5) of the Act of 1956. The Arbitrator dismissed the
application filed by NHAI by award dated 19.01.2024 and
the same was challenged by filing an application under
Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996
before the District Court and the same is also dismissed, and
accordingly, the present Arbitration Appeals are filed by the
appellant - NHAI.
19] It is to be noted that the matter was pending
before the Arbitrator for more than two years, however, no
113.25Appeal+
documents were filed in support of the affidavit in evidence
filed by the NHAI. The NHAI submitted the documents by e-
mail on 22.01.2024 after the award was passed by the
Arbitrator. The affidavit evidence and supporting
documents were filed by the respondent - claimants
whereas the NHAI has failed to do so.
20] While considering the application under Section
3-G (5) of the Act of 1956, Arbitrator has taken into
consideration the market value determined for the other
localities, the landowners were awarded Rs.16,700/- per
square meter for Satara, Rs.13,300/- per square meter for
Kanchanwadi. The Arbitrator has also taken into
consideration the fact that the Assistant Director, Town
Planning, Aurangabad, vide communication dated
15.06.2017, has also recommended the amount of
Rs.7,966/- to be correct market value of the acquired land
placed in Group-II of village Deolai on the basis of the
average of the highest sale instances, as calculated by the
Competent Authority Land Acquisition. It is also observed
113.25Appeal+
that as per the provisions of Section 26 of the Right to Fair
Compensation, Transparency in Land Acquisition,
Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 the Competent
Authority Land Acquisition has rightly determined the
correct market value. While taking into consideration the
average sale instances of the preceding three years from the
publication of notification under Section 3 (A) of the
National Highways Act, 1956, the provisions of Section 26
to 30 of the Right to Fair Compensation, Transparency in
Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013
have been appropriately applied. Considering the above, the
Arbitrator has dismissed the application under Section 3-G
(5) of the Act of 1956.
21] The learned Arbitrator has also observed that
the evidence produced by the claimants show that the prices
of the acquired lands is much higher than the compensation
granted and vide Award dated 19.01.2024, has observed as
under :
On examination of the sale deeds, it is clear that
the market value is much higher. The average of
113.25Appeal+
sale deeds as per Respondent is more than
Rs.12191/- per sq. mtrs. Therefore, the market
value mentioned in the sale deeds seems to be
appropriate. Though the respondent no.2 has
claimed enhancement by way of counter claim,
I am not inclined to decide the same in this
proceeding as the same has been initiated at the
instance of the applicants. Nevertheless, the
evidence produced by the respondent can be
used for verifying claim of applicants. From the
market value mentioned in sale deeds, it ample
clear that the market value of acquired land is
more than what is awarded by the CALA i.e.
more than Rs.7966/- per sq. mtrs. It would also
be apt to mention here that market value
discovered by CALA is further reduced on the
basis of the size of the acquired land.
Therefore, the market value determined by
the CALA is much lessser.
22] The argument of the learned counsel for the
NHAI that no fair opportunity was granted to the NHAI
while passing the award and the Award be set aside and the
matter be remitted back, does not appeal to this Court. The
NHAI has filed it's affidavit dated 30.10.2023 before the
Arbitrator where at para nos. 46, 47, 48 and 49, it has
stated as under :
46. The CALA has stated in the award dated 24.07.2017,
11.08.2017 and 28.02.2018 that Mauje Satara Tq. & District
113.25Appeal+
Aurangabad is situated on National Highway No.211 Dhule-
Solapur. Prior to the notification of 3 A nor at the time of
passing of the above said awards there was no existing National
Highway 211 Dhule-Solapur by-pass road newly constructed
passing through Mauje Devlai, Satara Tq. & Dist. Aurangabad
nor Mauje Devlai Satara Tq. Dist. Aurangabad is situated on
Beed bypass and the CALA has shown in the awards that the
lands from Mauje Devlai Satara are adjacent and situated on
National Highway 211 Dhule-Solapur. The sale deeds
considered by the CALA are not nearby to the acquired land.
47. That the CALA has awarded rate 13656/- per sqr.mtr. In
the first award dated 24.07.2017 of village Satara for the
acquired land bearing Gut No.318 and other acquired lands from
different guts. After passing of the second award dated
11.08.2017 of village Satara the CALA has reduced the rates for
the lands acquired from different Guts except the above said
land acquired from the above said Gut. It is contended in the
complaints that as the agreed amount of bribe by the land losers
were not given to CALA, second award was passed by reducing
the rates.
48. That the CALA has passed award dated 28.02.2018
awarding the rate Rs.16721/- to the land acquired from the Gut
No.318 & 310. The CALA has abnormally increased the rate for
the above said Gut within a period of six months between the
rates awarded in the award dated 24.07.2017, 11.08.2017 and
28.02.2018. The true market value is very less than the awarded
rates.
49. From the above said scenario the possibility of passing
of the impugned award is induced, affected by fraud and
corruption cannot be ruled out as there are complaints lodged
against the said CALA by various persons stating that the
113.25Appeal+
Competent Authority of Land Acquisition with collusion with
his associates awarded the rates of Highways to the lands which
are not on Highways and the inquiry report also support to the
contends spelt in the complaints above said.
23] In the above noted affidavit dated 30.10.2023
of NHAI, it is stated that there has been possible corruption
in considering the sale deeds and awarding compensation
for lands in nighbouring village Satara by the CALA and
that the CALA has awarded the compensation of
Rs.13,656/- per sq. mtr. in it's award dated 24.07.2017 of
the village Satara for the acquired land bearing Gut No.318
and other acquired lands from different guts. After passing
of the second award dated 11.08.2017 of village Satara, the
CALA has reduced the rates for the lands acquired from
different Guts and that there were various complaints of
bribe being taken. The CALA has also awarded
compensation @ Rs.16,721/- for some land in Satara village
and that the possibility of corruption cannot be ruled out in
the cases of determination of compensation in the acquired
lands of village Deolai.
113.25Appeal+
24] From the record produced, it can be seen that
the awards passed by the Arbitrator in respect of adjacent
village Satara granting compensation @ Rs.13,656/- per sq.
mtrs. and Rs.16,721/- per sq. mtrs. were not challenged by
the NHAI. It is also seen from para no.10 of the Award
dated 30.05.2023 in respect of acquisition for village Satara
for expansion of the same Highway that both the parties
have filed the joint pursis on 24.11.2022 for closing their
evidence and prayed for final hearing of the Arbitration
Reference without leading any evidence and later on the
NHAI, by letter dated 03.10.2023, has accepted the arbitral
award declared by the Arbitrator. Thus, in one hand the
National Highway Authority are alleging that for village
Satara the award was passed granting compensation @
Rs.13,656/- per sq. mtrs. by fraud, however, the same
award is not challenged by the NHAI. Thus, the NHAI is
blowing hot and cold at the same time.
25] The respondent has also given details of
acquisition of adjacent village Satara where the
113.25Appeal+
compensation for some lands are granted @ Rs.21,397/-
per square meters and yet the National Highway Authority
has entered into settlement with the claimants where the
claimants waived only one year interest and were granted
compensation as under :
Satara Settlement Detail
Sr.No Civil M.A. Party Name Gut No. Acquired CALA Arbitral Settlement
No. area in awarded compensation compensation
sq.m. compensation per sq. m. after
Rs. Per sq. m. deducting
CALA
Awarded
compensation
in (Rs.)
1. 35/21 NHAI Vs CALA & 311 4800 11,528/- 21,397/- 19,15,79,700/-
others
2. 36/21 NHAI Vs CALA & 311 2100 11,528/- 21,397/- 7,57,12,054/-
others
3. 38/21 NHAI Vs CALA & 318 7400 16,721/- 21,397/- 22,20,71,782/-
others
4. 39/21 NHAI Vs CALA & 310 7200 16,721/- 21,397/- 21,44,86,225/-
others
Total Settled Compensation Rs. 70,38,49,761/-
26] The lands of adjacent village Satara acquired for
expansion of the same Highway and the NHAI has accepted
the awards where compensation is granted @ Rs.13,656/-
per sq. mtrs. and Rs.16,721/- per sq. mtrs. and have
compromised some of the matters before the District Court
where compensation is granted @ Rs.21,397/- per sq. mtrs.
113.25Appeal+
In the present case, the NHAI has not filed any documents
on record for a period of 2 years to establish it's case before
the Arbitrator and the NHAI has failed to demonstrate its
case before the Arbitrator.
27] The respondent filed affidavit, which shows that
the lands are acquired at higher value, however, the
Arbitrator has refused to accept such higher value in
absence of separate arbitral application by the claimants
under Section 3-G (5) of the Act of 1956. In this situation,
the Arbitrator has dismissed the application of National
Highway Authority under Section 3-G (5) of the Act of
1956.
28] In the appeal, the District Court by a detail
order has considered all the arguments raised by the
petitioner. The District Court has observed that the material
produced by the landowners showed that the acquired land
is of more value and the Arbitrator has observed that the
NHAI has not been able to disprove the sale deeds filed by
the claimants, nor they have produced any evidence. As
113.25Appeal+
regards the allegation of NHAI that opportunity of placing
documents on record being not provided by the Arbitrator,
the Court has observed that the Advocate of NHAI has
forwarded the documents to the Collector by mail on
22.01.2024 i.e. after the matter was closed and award was
passed on 19.01.2024 in respect of Deolai village. It is
pertinent to mention that the subject of aforesaid mail was
"Index-II, Satara, Deolai, Gandheli, Asegaon, Talesaman,
Rail-Nawadi, Makranpura, Kannad", which shows that it
was common mail for both Talesaman and Deolai cases.
Having himself sent the documents belatedly after the
declaration of the impugned award, it is a misleading
argument on behalf of the NHAI to contend that their
documents are not considered by the Arbitrator. It is also
observed that the Advocates for both sides were heard on
several dates and in the case of Deolai, the Advocates filed
various applications from time to time and served copies
upon each other. On 06.06.2013, roznama states that last
chance is granted to NHAI for filing affidavit evidence.
Though last chance was granted, again on 13.06.2023,
113.25Appeal+
NHAi did not file the affidavit and again 'last chance' was
granted till 20.06.2023. Again on 20.06.2023, no steps were
taken by NHAI and same order was repeated. On
05.07.2025 also, affidavit was not filed and again matter is
adjourned to 12.07.2023. Even on 12.07.2023, 19.07.2023
and 26.07.2023 no affidavit was filed. The District Court
examined all the facts and stated that NHAI is at fault in not
filing its document along with affidavit in evidence and
NHAI has failed to do so.
29] The District Court has observed that the
Arbitrator has dismissed application filed by the NHAI by
award dated 19.01.2024 considering that the CALA has
relied upon 22 sale deeds and also considering that no
evidence was led by the initial for two years, the Arbitrator
has proceeded with determination of the award. The
claimants have filed evidence before the Arbitrator
indicating that the acquired lands were of higher price than
what is granted by CALA. The award of the Arbitrator has
been examined by the District Court in application filed
113.25Appeal+
under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act,
1996. The District Court has also examined all the
allegations made against the Arbitrator and rejected the
same. Considering the above, this Court do not see patent
illegality in the award of the Arbitrator more particularly
when the lands in the adjacent village are granted much
higher compensation. This Court would, thus, not entertain
the prayer to set-aside the Arbitral award and remand the
matter back to the Arbitrator.
30] The power of the court while entertaining an
application under Section 34/37 of the Act is circumscribed
by the limitation under Section 34/37 of the Arbitration
Act, 1996. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of PSA
Sical Terminals Private Limited Vs. Board of Trustees of V.O.
Chidambaranar Port Trust Tuticorn and Anr.reported in
(2023)15 SCC 781 has held has observed that it is a settled
legal position, that in an application under Section 34, the
court is not expected to act as an appellate court and
reappreciate the evidence. The scope of interference would
113.25Appeal+
be limited to grounds provided under Section 34 of the
Arbitration Act. The interference would be so warranted
when the award is in violation of "public policy of India",
which has been held to mean "the fundamental policy of
Indian law". A judicial intervention on account of interfering
on the merits of the award would not be permissible.
However, the principles of natural justice as contained in
Section 18 and 34(2)(a)(iii) of the Arbitration Act would
continue to be the grounds of challenge of an award. The
ground for interference on the basis that the award is in
conflict with justice or morality is now to be understood as
a conflict with the "most basic notions of morality or
justice". It is only such arbitral awards that shock the
conscience of the court, that can be set aside on the said
ground. An award would be set aside on the ground of
patent illegality appearing on the face of the award and as
such, which goes to the roots of the matter. However, an
illegality with regard to a mere erroneous application of law
would not be a ground for interference. Equally,
reappreciation of evidence would not be permissible on the
113.25Appeal+
ground of patent illegality appearing on the face of the
award.
31. Similarly, in the case of Government of Jammu
and Kashmir Vs. Hindustan Construction Company Ltd. and
others, MANU/JK/0116/2017 : AIR 2017 J&k 82, has
observed as under:
"12. The Supreme Court in Mc Dermott
International Inc. v. Burn Standard Co. Ltd.
MANU/SC/8177/2006: (2006) 11 SCC 181:
(2006 AIR SCW 3276 while taking note of the
decision rendered by it in Renusagar Power Co.
Ltd. v. General Electric Co.,
MANU/SC/0195/1994 : 1994 Supp (1) SCC
644: (AIR 1994 SC 860) held that an arbitral
award can be set aside if it is contrary to
fundamental policy of Indian law; the interests
of India; or justice or morality. However,
subsequently, in the case of ONGC Ltd. v. Saw
Pipes Ltd., MANU/SC/0314/2003: (2003) 5
SCC 705: (AIR 2003 SC 2629), the Supreme
Court added another ground for exercise of
Courts' jurisdiction for setting aside the award
i.e. if it is patently arbitrary. In Centrotrade
Minerals & Metals Inc. v. Hindustan Copper
Ltd., MANU/SC/8146/2006: (2006) 11 SCC
245: (AIR 2007 SC (Supp) 1770) it was held by
the Supreme Court that if an award suffers
from patent illegality which goes to the root of
the matter, the Court can interfere with the
award passed by the arbitrator. Thereafter in a
recent decision in the case of Associate Builders
v. Delhi Development Authority,
113.25Appeal+
MANU/SC/1076/2014: (2015) 3 SCC 49: (AIR
2015 SC 620) the Supreme Court after taking
note of various previous judgments rendered by
it with regard to scope of interference with the
arbitral award held that none of the grounds
contained in Section 34(2)(a) of the Act deals
with the merits of the decision rendered by an
arbitrator. It is only when the award is in
conflict with the public policy of India as
prescribed in Section 34(2)(b)(ii) of the Act
that the merits of an arbitral award are to be
looked into under certain specified
circumstances. It was further held that the
Court would interfere with an award passed by
an arbitrator if it is in violation of statute,
interest of India, justice or morality, patent
illegality, contravention of the Act or terms of
the contract. It was also held that the Court
hearing an appeal does not act as a Court of
appeal and consequently errors of fact cannot
be corrected. A possible view by the arbitrator
on facts has necessarily to pass muster as the
arbitrator is the ultimate master of the quantity
and quality of evidence to be relied upon when
he delivers his arbitral award. Thus, an award
based on little evidence or on evidence which
does not measure up in quality to a trained
legal mind would not be held to be invalid on
this score."
32] The District Court in detail has examined all the
contentions of the petitioner. I have also already observed
that the valuation of Rs.7966/- per sq. mtrs. for village
Deolai in comparison to the compensation granted to the
adjacent village of Satara appears to be reasonable, if not
113.25Appeal+
undervalued, more particularly, when the evidence by the
claimants shows that the lands of village Deolai could be of
higher value than granted by the CALA. Considering that,
the award of CALA being not disturbed by the Arbitrator so
also the District Court having rejected the application under
Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, no case is
made out by the petitioner under Section 37 of the
Arbitration Act. Hence, the present Arbitration Appeals are
dismissed.
33] In view of the dismissal of the Arbitration
Appeals, all pending Civil Applications are also disposed of.
[ARUN R. PEDNEKER]
JUDGE
DDC
