Alok Sharma, J. - (1.) THIS misc. appeal under section 37 of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter 'the Act of 1996') impugns the order dated 20.2.2009 passed by the Addl. District Judge No. 1, Ajmer (hereinafter 'the lower court'). Thereunder exercising its power under section 34 of the Act of 1996, the lower court has set aside the award dated 11.1.2008 and remanded the matter to the Arbitrator to decide the applicants respondents (Hereinafter 'the applicants') claim for enhancement of compensation for their land acquired under the National Highways Act, 1956 (hereinafter 'the Act of 1956').
(2.) THE facts of the case are that a notification came to be issued on 26.3.2001 under section 3A of the Act of 1956 for acquisition of certain lands belonging to respondents No. 1, 2 and 3 to an extent of 5665 sq. meters falling in Khasra Nos. 256, 7689 sq. meters of khasra No. 257/1 and 3399 sq. meters of khasra No. 257/2 aggregating to 16,753 sq. meters. An award came to be passed on 15.12.2002 for a sum of Rs. 16,89,347.76/ - as compensation for the land and Rs. 16,27,343/ - as compensation for construction aggregating to Rs. 33,16,690.76/ - in favour of the applicants. Dissatisfied with the quantum of compensation, the applicants filed an application No. 32/2003 on 1.10.2003 before the Collector/Arbitrator, Ajmer under the provisions of Section 3G (5) the Act of 1956 seeking enhancement of compensation. A reply of denial was filed by the appellant National Highways Authority of India (hereinafter 'the NHAI') on 22.11.2003. In the first instance the Arbitrator exercising his powers under section 3G (7) of the Act of 1956 enhanced the amount of compensation to a sum of Rs. 1,42,15,365/ - under his order dated 24.1.2004. The said award was challenged in a Public Interest Litigation by an organisation in the name and style of the Youth Welfare Society in SB Civil Writ petition No. 2884/2004. NHAI as defendants therein supported the case set up by the Youth Welfare Society and stated that the enhancement of the compensation under the Collector's order dated 24.1.2004 be set aside. In -fact NHAI itself had challenged the order of enhancement dated 24.1.2004 in a separate writ petition which was registered as SBCW P. No. 3701/2004. In the course of proceedings in SB Civil Writ Petition No. 2884/2004 in view of the similarity of challenge in SBCW P. No. 3701/2004, the PIL was transferred to the learned Single Judge and tagged with NHAI's writ petition. The learned Single Judge vide his judgment dated 13.6.2006 quashed the award dated 24.1.2004 and remanded the matter to the Collector/Arbitrator to decide afresh - with some scathing observations about the misuse of power. The operative portion of the order is reproduced as under: "Having heard learned counsel for the parties, without giving observations on the merits of the case, having considered all aspects and material available on the record, admittedly, the Collector, Ajmer has not justified his action to enhance the amount of award from Rs. 16,89,246/ - to Rs. 1,42,15,365/ - on the basis of one registered document of small piece of land and not cared to consider the DLC rates. This is nothing but misuse of power." "Further, I am also of the view that enquiry conducted by one man committee also not cared to examine the prevailing market rate as fixed by the District Level Committee regarding the area in question. I do not want to express my opinion on the merit and without expressing any opinion on the merit, I deem it proper to quash and set aside the enhancement order dated 24.1.2004 passed by the Collector (Arbitrator), Ajmer and remand the matter back to the Collector (Arbitrator) to decide the matter of compensation afresh considering the DLC rates on the prevailing date of passing of the award and shall pass fresh order of compensation because huge public amount is involved in this matter." The order dated 13.6.2006 was challenged by way of DB Civil Special Appeal (Writ). The appeal was however withdrawn. But all the same directions were issued by the Hon'ble Division Bench as under: "(i) The appellants shall be permitted by the Collector (Arbitrator) under Section 3G of National Highways Act, 1956 to produce additional evidence in support of their claim for enhanced compensation. (ii) We record and accept the statement of the counsel that the appellants shall conclude their additional evidence within one month from the date of appearance (as may be fixed by us in the order). (iii) The respondent No. 1 shall also be given an opportunity to rebut the additional evidence of the appellants by the Collector, Ajmer (Arbitrator). The respondent No. 1 shall complete their evidence in rebuttal within two months from the completion of the evidence of the appellants. (iv) The appellants and the respondent No. 1 are directed to appear before the Collector, Ajmer (Arbitrator) on 10th September 2007. (vi) The Collector, Ajmer (Arbitrator) shall hear and decide the dispute concerning enhancement of compensation as early as possible and in no case later than four from the date of appearance of the parties."
(3.) A reading of the order dated 23.8.2007 passed by the Hon'ble Division Bench clearly indicates that the applicants were allowed to produce additional evidence in support of their claim for enhancement of compensation and the NHAI had a right of rebuttal thereto. A time frame for decision by the Arbitrator on the application for enhancement subsequent to the remand by the learned Single Judge under the order dated 13.6.2006 was also fixed.;