AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Arindam Sinha, J
Mr. Sarangi, learned senior advocate appears on behalf of appellants. He submits, part of his clients’ house was acquired for expansion of National Highway 5. In his clients’ writ petition WP(C) no.2246 of 2004 there was order dated 15th October, 2004, whereby there was direction for fresh measurement to be made by the Assistant Engineer. He submits, the measurement was directed of the entire house, as would be affected by demolition of part thereof. On basis of the fresh measurement, there was an assessment. His client being aggrieved by the assessment had claimed enhancement. In the reference, argument was concluded on 25th May, 2007. The award was purportedly published on 26th February, 2010 but delivered to his clients on 5th August, 2010. He submits, the award passed after such long delay is by itself illegal. Without prejudice he submits, the assessed amount at Rs.2,58,648/- was not paid. There ought to have been pendente lite interest granted under section 31(7)(a) in Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, by the arbitrator. Furthermore, there was enhancement by approximately Rs.27,000/-. This was not been paid. In the award there ought to have been direction for payment of interest thereon under both clauses (a) and (b) in sub-section (7) of section 31.
Mr. Mohanty, learned advocate appears on behalf of respondents. He will be heard on adjourned date.
List on 12th October, 2022.
............................................