NARESH YADAV Vs. SUB DIVISIONAL OFFICE REVENUE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) They are heard and perused the documents filed on record.

(2.) This appeal has been preferred by the appellant Naresh Yadav against the order dtd. 20/7/2023 passed by the II District Judge, Garoth, District Mandsaur in MJC No.17 of 2022 whereby the application filed by the appellant under Sec. 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (in short 'the Act of 1996') assailing the order dtd. 9/11/2020 passed by the Arbitrator/Commissioner, Ujjain under The National Highways Act, 1956 (in short 'the Act of 1956') has been rejected on the ground that the application is barred by Sec. 63 of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (in short 'the Act of 2013').

(3.) Counsel for the appellant, at the outset, has drawn the attention of this Court to the fact that the original award was passed by the Arbitrator/Commissioner, Ujjain under Sec. 3G(5) of the Act of 1956 and Sub-sec. (6) of the same provides that subject to the provisions of this Act, the provisions of the Act of 1996 shall apply to every arbitration under this Act. Thus, it is submitted that the learned Judge of the District Court has erred in applying the provisions of the Act of 2013 in place of the Act of 1956, hence the impugned order be set aside and the matter may be remanded back for its fresh disposal under the provisions of the Act of 1996.