AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
At the outset, learned counsel for the parties would submit that the matter in issue has already been decided by this Court in ARBA No.43/2021 (Bhagawat Sonker Vs. UOI & Others) & other connected matters on 7.4.2022 and the present Appeal may also be disposed of in the same terms. Therefore, with the consent of the parties, the matter is heard finally.
This Appeal has been preferred against the order dated 12.2.2021 passed in Misc. Civil Suit (Arbitration) No.42/2019 by the learned District Judge, Baloda Bazar whereby the award passed by the Arbitrator was modified and the Court has recalculated the compensation and partly allowed the Application under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (for short ‘the Act’).
This Appeal was filed on short premise to direct the respondents to calculate the compensation strictly as per the order of the Arbitrator dated 17.102019 by taking the market value to the tune of Rs.11,520/-per square meter, as the learned District Judge has erred in calculating the compensation under the slab system though the learned Arbitrator in his order has taken Rs.11520/- per square meter as market value of the land. So the compensation is required to be calculated on that basis. Therefore, the Appeal may be allowed.
Learned counsel appearing for the NHAI has raised an objection that the award passed by the Arbitrator cannot be modified invoking the provisions of Section 34 of the Act in the teeth of judgment rendered by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the matter of Project Director, National Highways No.45 E and 220 National Highways Authority of India Vs. M. Hakeem and Another {(2021) 9 SCC 1 : 2021 SCC OnLine SC 473}.
This Court, while deciding the batch of Appeals i.e. ARBA No.43/2021 & other connected matters, has already set aside the impugned order dated 12.2.2021 passed by the District Judge, Baloda Bazar and the following directions/observations was made:-
“25. Hence this Court is of the view that the aforesaid appeals are liable to be disposed of on the aforesaid legal premise. The impugned orders dated 12/02/2021 passed by the District Judge, BalodaBazar in the aforesaid cases are accordingly set-aside to the extent the awards were modified and earlier the remand was made, however, setting aside the awards of the Arbitrator are confirmed and the parties are free to resume arbitration again, if they so desire, against the award passed by the CALA initially on 11.10.2012.
The question of inadequate amount of Court fee was affixed in the Applications preferred under Section 34 of the Act, 1996 by the appellants/claimants before the District Judge. According to the Schedule of Chhattisgarh Arbitration Rules, 2007, Court Fee of Rs.1,000/- was required to be affixed, but the claimants had affixed Court Fee of Rs.500/- only. Such question remained undecided during adjudication by the District Judge, which caused detriment to the revenue. Therefore, it is directed that the claimants/appellants shall pay deficit additional Court Fee of Rs.500/- within a period of 45 days from the date of receipt of copy of this judgment, failing which the application preferred under Section 34 of the Act, 1996 shall be treated as dismissed and consequently, the appellate order shall also not be given effect to.
It is made clear that any of the observations made by this Court in the preceding paragraphs shall not come in the way of adjudication before the Arbitrator inasmuch as this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case. The Arbitrator shall decide the issue considering all the aspects of the matter afresh, which are raised before him, if any. On such application being made before the Arbitrator, the same is expected to be decided expeditiously, preferably within 4 months.”
Accordingly, the present Appeal is also disposed of in the same terms. A copy of the judgment rendered by this Court in ARBA No.43/2021 & other connected matters be placed on record of this Appeal.
No order as to costs.