Karnataka High Court
T. Younis S/O. Late Hajee Ameer Sab vs National Highways Authority Of India, on 29 August, 2012
Author: H.G.Ramesh
Bench: H.G.Ramesh
-1-
W.P.Nos.63881 & 63913-915/2012
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
CIRCUIT BENCH AT DHARWAD
DATED THIS THE 29TH DAY OF AUGUST 2012
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.G.RAMESH
Writ Petition Nos.63881 & 63913-915/2012 (GM-RES)
BETWEEN:
T.YOUNIS
S/O LATE HAJEE AMEER SAB
AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS
M/S. SEEMA TRADERS
APOLLO TYRE DEALERS
OLD CHECK POST
HARIHARA ROAD, HOSPET
BELLARY DISTRICT ...PETITIONER
(BY SRI PRASHANT HOSAMANI FOR
SRI S S PATIL, ADVOCATES)
AND:
1. NATIONAL HIGHWAYS AUTHORITY
OF INDIA, PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION
UNIT, 2ND CROSS, SATTUR COLONY
VIDYAGIRI, DHARWAD
REPRESENTED BY THE GENERAL
MANAGER (TECH) & PROJECT DIRECTOR
2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER/
ARBITRATOR APPOINTED UNDER
NATIONAL HIGHWAYS ACT
BELLARY DISTRICT, BELLARY
3. COMPETANT AUTHORITY & LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER
HOUSE NO.1032 A, NEAR SAI &
HARIPRIYA APARTMENTS
SHRI SAI BABA ROAD, HOSPET ...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI H R BENTUR, ADVOCATE FOR R-1;
1
-2-
W.P.Nos.63881 & 63913-915/2012
SRI SACHIN S MAGADUM, ADVOCATE FOR R-1;
SRI MAHESH WODEYAR, ADVOCATE FOR R-2;
NOTICE TO R-3 DISPENSED WITH)
THESE WRIT PETITIONS ARE FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226
& 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE
ORDER PASSED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT-AUTHORITY-
ARBITRATOR ORDER DATED 17/05/2012 IN PROCEEDINGS VIDE
ANNEXURE-C, IN RESPECT OF PETITIONER.
THESE WRIT PETITIONS COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY
HEARING IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE
FOLLOWING:
ORDER
H.G.RAMESH, J. (Oral):
These writ petitions are directed against the order dated 17.05.2012 (Annexure-C) passed by respondent no.2 - Arbitrator holding that the application filed by respondent no.1-National Highways Authority of India under Section 3G(5) of the National Highways Act, 1956 ('the Highways Act') is not barred by limitation.
2. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the impugned order at Annexure-C.
3. Sub-section (6) of Section 3G of the Highways Act states that subject to the provisions of the Highways Act, the provisions of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 ('the Arbitration Act') shall apply to every arbitration under 2 -3- W.P.Nos.63881 & 63913-915/2012 the Highways Act. Section 43 of the Arbitration Act states that the Limitation Act, 1963 ('the Limitation Act') shall apply to arbitrations as it applies to proceedings in Court. In effect, the Limitation Act will apply to a proceeding under Section 3G(5) of the Highways Act. In my opinion, as no specific period of limitation is provided for filing an application under Section 3G(5) of the Highways Act, Article 137 of the Limitation Act applies and accordingly the application will have to be filed within three years from the date when the right to apply accrues to the applicant. In the present case, the application was filed by respondent no.1 within about four months from the date of determination of the compensation by the Competent Authority under sub-section (1) of Section 3G of the Highways Act. Accordingly, the impugned order passed by respondent no.2-Arbitrator holding that the application filed by respondent no.1 under Section 3G(5) of the Highways Act was within the period of limitation is correct in law and does not call for any interference. The writ petitions are devoid of merit and are accordingly 3 -4- W.P.Nos.63881 & 63913-915/2012 dismissed. In view of dismissal of the writ petitions, I.A.I/2012 filed for vacating of the interim order does not survive for consideration; it stands disposed of accordingly.
Petitions dismissed.
SD/-
JUDGE hkh.
4