Suresh Pal And Others vs Collector/Arbitrator, Haridwar And Another s

Pankaj Purohit, J

By this writ petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has challenged the order dated 31.08.2022, passed by the learned District Judge, Haridwar, in Miscellaneous Case No.447 of 2019, “Suresh Pal and others Vs. Collector Haridwar and others”, Annexure no.1, to the writ petition, whereby the application filed by the petitioners for condoning the delay in filing the restoration application against the arbitration award has been rejected and consequently the restoration application was also dismissed.

It is the case of the petitioners that the award has been passed on 17.12.2012, against the respondent/NHAI, and the application under section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 was preferred by the petitioners, which was registered in the file of the District Judge, Haridwar as Arbitration Case No.75 of 2013, “Santu Vs. Collector Haridwar and others”.

The said application of the petitioners was dismissed for default on 26.09.2014. The petitioners preferred a restoration application along with the delay condonation application for condoning the delay of about five years in filing the restoration application. By reasons of the impugned judgment, the learned District Judge, Haridwar, rejected the application for condoning the delay and consequently the restoration application stand dismissed.

The contention of the learned counsel for the petitioners is that the reasons which has been given by the petitioners for condoning the delay in delay condonation application, that their father, was pursuing the case before the learned District Judge, but unfortunately he expired on 03.08.2013, and the petitioners could not get the knowledge about the pendency of the Arbitration Case No.75 of 2013, pending before the learned District Judge, Haridwar, and consequently the same was dismissed in default on 26.09.2014. This fact came to the notice of petitioners only when villagers rumoured about it in 2019.

The application for condonation was opposed by the learned counsel for the respondent/NHAI, by filing an objection, and in that objection it has been stated that no sufficient reason has been given by the petitioners for delay for moving the restoration application. Learned District Judge, by the reasons of the order dated 31.08.2022, has refused to condone the delay and delay condonation application rejected and consequently the restoration application was also stand rejected.

Having heard the learned counsels for the parties and perusal of the impugned order, it appears that the reasons, which have been assigned by the learned District Judge, while not condoning the delay are forlorn and the same cannot be sustained. The reasons, which have been assigned by the petitioners regarding the death of their father i.e. late Santu, who was pursuing the matter and after his death on 03.08.2013, the petitioners do not have any knowledge about the pendency of the aforesaid miscellaneous case being the illiterate villagers.

In this view of the matter, the judgment and order dated 31.08.2022, cannot be sustained, and the same is hereby quashed. The delay in filing the restoration application is hereby condoned. Accordingly, the District Judge, Haridwar is directed to hear the restoration application on its own merit.

The writ petition is disposed of.