High CourtsSingle Bench(2018) 04 CHH CK 0302

Dilip Das vs Smt Monica Das

Chhattisgarh High Court · Decided on 25 April 2018

HON’BLE JUDGES
SANJAY K. AGRAWAL, J
RESULT
Dismissed
CASE NUMBER
WPC No. 1150 of 2018

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

12 paragraphs · 241 words
1.

This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner against the order dated 27.09.2017 passed by learned Arbitrator / Additional Commissioner,

Surguja Division, Ambikapur, under Section 3(G)(5) of the National Highways Act, 1956 (for short, the 'Act of 1956').

2.

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the impugned order is unsustainable and bad in law and it is also without jurisdiction

and without authority of law.

3.

I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner, considered the submissions made herein above and perused the record with utmost circumspection.

4.

By the impugned order, the learned Arbitrator appointed under the provisions of National Highways Act, 1956 has rejected the petitioner's

application filed under Section 3(G)(5) of the Act of 1956. By virtue of provisions contained in Section 3(G)(6) of the Act of 1956, the provisions of

Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (in short, 'Act of 1996') would be applicable, therefore, petitioner's remedy is to file application under Section

34(2) of the Act of 1996 for setting aside the order / award passed by the learned Arbitrator as held by order of this Court in WPC No. 3170/2017

(Surendra Kumar Chhabda v. State of Chhattisgarh & Others).

5.

In view of that, the instant writ petition is dismissed as not maintainable. However, it will be open to the petitioner to proceed in accordance with

law to challenge the order passed by the learned Arbitrator. No order as to cost(s).