High Court of Karnataka Dismisses Appeals in Land Acquisition Arbitration Cases -- Appellants Failed to Prove Grounds Under Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 for Setting Aside Arbitral Awards

Sub Category: Karnataka High Court Bench: BENGALURU
  • 35
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The High Court of Karnataka dismissed multiple Miscellaneous First Appeals filed by landowners against arbitral awards related to land acquisition by the National Highway Authority of India. The appellants sought to challenge judgments dated 01.02.2024 from the Principal District and Sessions Judge, Chitradurga, which had upheld arbitrator's orders dated 06.01.2022 denying their compensation claims. The court found that the appeals, filed under Section 37(1)(c) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, failed to demonstrate any statutory ground for interference with the arbitral awards. The court emphasized the narrow scope of judicial review in arbitration matters and upheld the finality of the arbitral process, dismissing all appeals.

Headnote

The High Court of Karnataka at Bengaluru, heard Miscellaneous First Appeals filed under Section 37(1)(c) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 -- The appeals were against judgments and awards dated 01.02.2024 passed by the Principal District and Sessions Judge, Chitradurga, in various arbitration applications -- The appellants sought to set aside the arbitrator's orders dated 06.01.2022 and obtain compensation for land acquisition -- The court examined whether the appeals met the statutory grounds for interference under Section 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 -- The court held that the appellants failed to establish any jurisdictional error or violation of public policy in the arbitral awards -- The appeals were dismissed as lacking merit, upholding the principle of limited judicial intervention in arbitral matters

Issue of Consideration: The Issue of Consideration was whether the appeals filed under Section 37(1)(c) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 against the judgments and awards of the Principal District and Sessions Judge, Chitradurga, should be allowed by setting aside the arbitrator's orders dated 06.01.2022 and granting compensation as prayed for

Final Decision

The High Court dismissed all Miscellaneous First Appeals, holding that the appellants failed to establish any ground for interference under Section 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. The court upheld the judgments dated 01.02.2024 passed by the Principal District and Sessions Judge, Chitradurga.

2026 LawText (KAR) (01) 38

Miscellaneous First Appeal No. 3519 of 2024 (AA) C/W Miscellaneous First Appeal No. 3520 of 2024, Miscellaneous First Appeal No. 3559 of 2024, Miscellaneous First Appeal No. 3563 of 2024, Miscellaneous First Appeal No. 3570 of 2024, Miscellaneous First Appeal No. 3580 of 2024, and 20 others

2026-01-28

Vibhu Bakhru CJ. , C.M. Poonacha J.

MFA No. 3519 of 2024 C/W MFA No. 3520 of 2024 MFA No. 3559 of 2024 AND 20 OTHERS

Sri S.N. Prashanth Chandra, Sri Amit M. Hegde, Smt. Sruti C Chaganti, Sri K.S. Harish

Parashuramappa, S.T. Mallikarjuna, N. Kannumappa, Lalithamma, B.H. Sandeep Kumar, B.H. Santhosh Kumar, Sanjeevappa, and others

The Special Land Acquisition Officer, National Highway Authority of India, The Project Director, National Highways Authority of India, The Arbitrator/District Commissioner, District Commissioner Office, Chitradurga

Nature of Litigation: Appeals against arbitral awards in land acquisition matters

Remedy Sought

The appellants sought setting aside of arbitrator's orders dated 06.01.2022 and grant of compensation for acquired lands

Filing Reason

Dissatisfaction with judgments dated 01.02.2024 passed by the Principal District and Sessions Judge, Chitradurga, which upheld the arbitrator's decisions

Previous Decisions

Arbitrator's orders dated 06.01.2022 denied compensation claims, which were upheld by the Principal District and Sessions Judge, Chitradurga through judgments dated 01.02.2024

Issues

Whether the appeals under Section 37(1)(c) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 should be allowed by setting aside the arbitrator's orders and granting compensation

Submissions/Arguments

The appellants argued for setting aside the arbitrator's orders dated 06.01.2022 and granting compensation as prayed for The respondents defended the arbitral awards and the subsequent court judgments upholding them

Ratio Decidendi

Appeals under Section 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 have limited scope -- Judicial interference with arbitral awards is restricted to specific statutory grounds -- Appellants must demonstrate jurisdictional error or violation of public policy to succeed -- The principle of finality in arbitration proceedings must be respected unless exceptional circumstances exist

Judgment Excerpts

This MFA is filed under Section 37(1)(c) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, against the judgment and decree dated 01.02.2024 The court held that the appeals lacked merit and failed to establish grounds for interference under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996

Procedural History

Land acquisition proceedings initiated -- Arbitration applications filed before the District Commissioner -- Arbitrator's orders dated 06.01.2022 denying compensation -- Appeals filed before Principal District and Sessions Judge, Chitradurga -- Judgments dated 01.02.2024 upholding arbitrator's orders -- Miscellaneous First Appeals filed before High Court under Section 37(1)(c) of Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996

Related Judgement
High Court High Court of Karnataka Dismisses Appeals in Land Acquisition Arbitration Cases ...
Related Judgement
Supreme Court Supreme Court Overturns Conviction for Use of Criminal Force by Public Servant i...