Shri. H.S. Shantharaj Aradya vs National Highway Authority Of ...
2023 Latest Caselaw 6105 Kant

                                                -1-
                                                           NC: 2023:KHC-D:9755-DB
                                                       MFA No. 101623 of 2017




                       IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH
                            DATED THIS THE 30TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2023
                                             PRESENT
                          THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.R. KRISHNA KUMAR
                                                AND
                              THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE G BASAVARAJA
                      MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 101623 OF 2017 (AA)

                 BETWEEN:

                 SHRI. H.S.SHANTHRAJ ARADHYA
                 S/O. SRI. H.M. SIDDAVEERAIAH,
                 AGE: 60 YEARS, OCC: MATHADISH (PONTIFF),
                 TAPOVAN TEMPLE ROAD, AMARAVATHI,
                 HOSPET, BELLARY (VIJAYNAGAR) DISTRICT,
                 REPRESENTED BY HIS GPA HOLDER,
                 VEERABHADRIAYYA CHIKKAMATH.
                                                                     ...APPELLANT
                 (BY SRI. VEERESH R.BUDIHAL, ADVOCATE FOR
                    SRI.MANJUNATH A.KARIGANNAVAR, ADVOCATE)
                 AND:
                 1.     NATIONAL HIGHWAY AUTHORITY OF INDIA
                        PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION UNIT,
                        BENGALURU, 2ND CROSS,
                        SATTUR COLONY, VIDYAGIRI,
JAGADISH T R            DHARWAD, REP. BY ITS GENERAL MANAGER,
HIGH COURT
OF                      (TECH) AND PROJECT DIRECTOR.
KARNATAKA
2023.09.01
12:07:07 +0530
                 2.     COMPETENT AUTHORITY AND
                        SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION
                        OFFICER FOR NATIONAL HIGHWAY
                        PROJECT, HOUSE NO.102-A,
                        NEAR SAI AND HARIPRIYA PARTMENT,
                        SRI SAI BABA ROAD, HOSPET,
                        BELLARY(VIJAYNAGAR) DISTRICT.

                 3.     THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER
                        CUM-ARBITRATOR,
                        BELLARY OFFICE OF THE D.C.
                        BELLARY DISTRICT.
                                                                  ...RESPONDENTS
                                -2-
                                          NC: 2023:KHC-D:9755-DB
                                       MFA No. 101623 of 2017




(BY SMT.SHILPA SHA, ADV. FOR SRI.SHIVARAJ S.BALLOLI, ADV. FOR
R1 AND R2; SRI.G.K.HIREGOUDAR, GOVT.ADVOCATE FOR R3)

      THIS MFA IS FILED U/S.37(1) OF ARBITRATION AND
CONCILIATION ACT, 1996, PRAYING TO, QUASH THE ORDERS
DATED 10.03.2014 AND 30.01.2017 PASSED BY THE COURT OF
PRINCIPAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BALLARI IN
AC.14/2013; QUASH THE ORDER DATED 16.02.2013 PASSED BY THE
RESPONDENT NO.3 IN PROCEEDINGS BEARING NIL; AFFIRM THE
AWARD PASSED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.2 BEARING REFERENCE
NO.1ST 3(D) NOTIFICATION AND AWARD COPY AND 2ND 3(D)
NOTIFICATION AND AWARD COPY DATED 05.12.2011.

     THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS DAY,
S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

                          JUDGMENT

This appeal by the applicant/plaintiff in AC No.15/2013

is directed against the impugned orders dated 10.03.2014

and 30.01.2017 passed by the learned Principal District and

Sessions Judge, Ballari (for short, 'trial Court') in proceedings

instituted by the appellant under Sections 34 of the

Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (for short, 'Act of

1996').

2. Heard the learned counsel for the appellant;

learned counsel for respondents No.1 and 2 as well as

learned Government Advocate for respondent No.3/State

and perused the material on record.

NC: 2023:KHC-D:9755-DB MFA No. 101623 of 2017

3. The material on record discloses that pursuant to

the acquisition proceedings initiated by respondents No.1

and 2 in relation to subject lands, respondent No.2 passed

an award dated 5.12.2011 determining the compensation

payable in favour of the appellant. Aggrieved by the same,

respondent No.1 approached the statutory arbitrator under

Section 3G(5) of the National Highways Act, 1956, which was

allowed by respondent No.3/Arbitrator vide order dated

16.02.2013. Aggrieved by the arbitral award passed by

respondent No.3, the appellant filed petition under Section

34 of the Act of 1996 before the trial Court. In the first

instance, the trial Court invoked Section 34(4) of the Act of

1996 and remitted the matter back to the Arbitrator by

directing him to hold enquiry and submit a report in this

regard. Pursuant thereto, both parties appeared before the

Arbitrator, who proceeded to pass fresh/new award dated

14.10.2015, which was communicated to the trial Court only

on 11.01.2017.

4. A perusal of the material on record including the

order sheet maintained by the trial Court in AC No.15/2013

NC: 2023:KHC-D:9755-DB MFA No. 101623 of 2017

will indicate that the trial Court has proceeded to

straightaway accept the fresh/new award passed by the

Arbitrator without assigning any reasons or without

considering the various contentions/claims urged by the

appellant, who is before this Court by way of present appeal.

5. Insofar as challenge of the appellant to the order

dated 10.03.2014 passed by the trial Court under Section

34(4) of the Act of 1996 is concerned, in the light of

undisputed fact that pursuant to the said order, whereby the

trial Court remitted the matter back to the Arbitrator for the

purpose of holding enquiry and to submit a report, the

appellant participated in the said proceedings before the

Arbitrator coupled with provisions contained in Section 37 of

the Act of 1996, which does not permit an order under

Section 34(4) of the Act of 1996 to be challenged by way of

present appeal before this Court, we are of the considered

view that the challenge in the present appeal to the

impugned order dated 10.03.2014 is liable to be rejected.

6. A perusal of the material on record including the

impugned order passed by the trial Court will indicate that

NC: 2023:KHC-D:9755-DB MFA No. 101623 of 2017

apart from the fact that the trial Court has summarily

accepted fresh/new award dated 14.10.2015 passed by the

Arbitrator without providing sufficient and reasonable

opportunity to the appellant to file his objections to the

fresh/new award dated 14.10.2015 or to put-forth his

contentions in this regard, the impugned order dated

30.01.2017 passed by the trial Court is an unreasoned, non-

speaking, cryptic and laconic order without assigning any

reasons as to why fresh/new arbitral award was being

accepted by the trial Court. It is needless to state that it

was incumbent upon the trial Court to pass a

detailed/speaking order on the Section 34 petition after

receipt of the fresh/new arbitral award.

7. Under these circumstances, without expressing

any opinion on the merits/demerits of the rival contentions

and on account of the patent illegality and procedural

impropriety in the impugned order, whereby the trial Court

has straightway accepted the fresh/new arbitral award

without assigning any reasons and without passing a

detailed/speaking order, we deem it just and appropriate to

NC: 2023:KHC-D:9755-DB MFA No. 101623 of 2017

set-aside the impugned order dated 30.01.2017 and remit

the matter back to the trial Court for reconsideration afresh

in accordance with law.

8. In the result, we proceed to pass the following:

ORDER

(a) Appeal stands allowed.

(b) The impugned order dated 30.01.2017 passed in AC No.15/2013 by the trial Court is hereby set-aside;

(c) The challenge to the impugned order dated 10.3.2014 in AC No.15/2013 by the trial Court is hereby rejected.

(d) The matter is remitted back to the trial Court for reconsideration afresh in accordance with law;

(e) Both parties to appear before the trial Court on 25.09.2023 without awaiting further notice from the trial Court.

(f) Liberty is reserved in favour of the parties to file their objections, if any, to the fresh/new arbitral award dated 14.10.2015 and also to produce documents which shall

NC: 2023:KHC-D:9755-DB MFA No. 101623 of 2017

be considered by the trial Court in accordance with law.

(g) The trial Court is directed to dispose off the proceedings in AC No.15/2013 on or before 21.12.2023.

(h) All rival contentions of the parties are kept open and no opinion is expressed on the same.

Sd JUDGE

Sd JUDGE

JTR