IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 28TH DAY OF JANUARY 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE WRIT PETITION NO.38440 OF 2016 (GM-RES) BETWEEN:
1. SMT. HEMALATHA J. SHETTY W/O LATE JUSTICE JAGANNATHA SHETTY AGED ABOUT 80 YEARS R/A #1092, IV BLOCK 18TH ‘B’ MAIN ROAD RAJAJINAGAR BANGALORE-560010.
2. PARINITHA SHETTY D/O LATE JUSTICE JAGANNATHA SHETTY AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS R/A #222, 5TH CROSS RMV 2ND STAGE BANGALORE-560094.
3. BABITHA SHETTY D/O LATE JUSTICE JAGANNATHA SHETTY AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS R/AT #1092, 5TH CROSS 18TH ‘B’ MAIN ROAD, RAJAJINAGAR BANGALORE-560010.
… PETITIONERS (By Mr. SAMPAT ANAND SHETTY, ADV., (ABSENT)) AND:
1. THE ARBITRATOR (N.H.66 EARLIER N.H.17) AND DEPUTY COMMISSIONER UDUPI DISTRICT UDUPI-576101.
2. NATIONAL HIGHWAY AUTHORITY OF INDIA PIU-MANGALORE REP. BY ITS PROJECT DIRECTOR #HOUSE NO.7-35/10(4) NEAR PUMPWELL SHREE MAHALINGESHWARA TEMPLE ROAD KANKANADY, MANGALORE-575002.
3. COMPETENT AUTHORITY AND ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER KUNDAPURA TALUK UDUPI DISTRICT-576201.
… RESPONDENTS (By Mr. M.V. KNIN & CO. ADV., FOR R2 (ABSENT) Mr. Y.D. HARSHA, LEARNED AGA FOR R1 & R3) - - -
This Writ Petition is filed under Articles 226 & 227 of the Constitution of India, praying to direct to the effect that the compensation determined by the R-1 arbitrator purportedly in exercise of his power under Section 3-G(5) of the National Highways Act, 1956 as by per his award dated 19-6-2015 vide Anexure-A is evidently not in consonance with he mandatory requirements enjoined on the said authority in terms of the 3-G (7) (A) to (D) of the National Highways Act, 1956 as amended and etc.
This Writ Petition coming on for hearing this day, the Court made the following:-
ORDER None for the petitioners.
Sri.Y.D.Harsha, learned Additional Government Advocate for the respondent Nos.1 and 3.
2. In this petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners inter alia seek quashment of the award dated 19.06.2015 passed by the Arbitrator in exercise of powers under Section 3-G(5) of the National Highways Act, 1956. The petitioners also seek a declaration that the proceedings initiated by respondent No.2 namely National Highway Authority of India seeking to set aside the award dated 10.06.2015 passed by the respondent No.1 by means of arbitration suit namely A.S. No.25/2015 pending before the District and Sessions Judge, Udupi is a gross abuse of provisions contained under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’ for short).
3. From perusal of the record as well as the objections filed by the respondents, it is evident that the arbitration suit namely A.S.No.25/2015 filed by the National Highway Authority of India was pending for final arguments and was fixed for final arguments on 18.02.2017, 27.02.2017 and 18.03.2017. The petitioners should have participated in the proceeding of the arbitration suit. In case the petitioners were aggrieved by the award passed by the Arbitrator dated 19.06.2015, they had the remedy of challenging the same by way of filing an application under Section 34 of the Act. The reliefs claimed for in this writ petition are misconceived and no ground for entertaining the writ petition is made out.
Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed.
Sd/- JUDGE RV