RAVI MALIMATH,J. - (1.)The case of the petitioner is that he is the owner of the lands bearing Khasra No.918 admeasuring 0.886 hectare, Khasra No.919 admeasuring 0.458 hectare and Khasra No.922 admeasuring 1.023 hectares, situated in village Pali, Municipal Council, Birsinghpur Pali, Ward No.4, Police Station and Tahsil Pali, District Umaria (M.P.). That the respondent No.3 namely Madhya Pradesh Road Development Corporation acquired 0.477 hectare in part of Khasra No.918 area 0.886 hectare, 0.010 hectare in part of Khasra No.919 area 0.458 hectare and 0.010 hectares in part of Khasra No.922 area 1.023 hectares. An award was passed on 30/7/2015, wherein the petitioner was granted compensation of Rs.10,39,638.00 for area 0.477 hectare, Rs.21,795.00 for 0.010 hectare and Rs.21,795.00 for 0.010 hectares. Being dissatisfied with the quantum of award, the petitioner challenged the same under Sec. 3G(5) of the National Highways Act, 1956 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act of 1956") before the learned Commissioner-cum-Arbitrator, Shahdol Division, Shahdol.
(2.)He also filed an application under Sec. 5 of the Limitation Act seeking to condone the delay, if any, in challenging the said award. The Arbitrator dismissed the appeal on the ground that there is no reason to condone the delay in filing the appeal. Aggrieved by the same, the instant petition is filed.
(3.)The learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the impugned order passed by the Arbitrator is bad in law and, therefore, liable to be set aside. That there is a delay of about 4 years in challenging the award. That in terms of Sec. 20 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act of 1996"), the petitioner had to file an application within 3 years from the date of the award. The same has been filed after 4 years. The reason explained for condoning the delay requires to be accepted by the Arbitrator.