NATIONAL HIGHWAYS AUTHORITY OF INDIA THR ITS PROJECT DIRECTOR B S SALUNKE MANORKAR DEEPAK S vs BHIKA SHRIDHAR WANI AND ORS — CA/11309/2024
Case under Arbitration and Concilation Act 1996 Section 37. Disposed: Contested--DISMISSED on 17th April 2026.
CNR: HCBM030181772022
Filing Number
CA/13796/2022
Filing Date
07-05-2022
Registration No
CA/11309/2024
Registration Date
16-10-2024
Judge
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE ARUN R. PEDNEKER
Coram
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE ARUN R. PEDNEKER
Bench Type
Single
Judicial Branch
Civil
Decision Date
17th April 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--DISMISSED
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
NATIONAL HIGHWAYS AUTHORITY OF INDIA THR ITS PROJECT DIRECTOR B S SALUNKE MANORKAR DEEPAK S
Respondent(s)
BHIKA SHRIDHAR WANI AND ORS
Adv. ,BONDAR UTTAM BAJIRAO,ADV. U.B. BONDAR FOR R/3 1123
Hearing History
Judge: HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE ARUN R. PEDNEKER
DUE ORDERS- CIVIL
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 23-03-2026 | DUE ORDERS- CIVIL |
| 17-04-2026 |
Orders
Summary of CA 11309/2024 The High Court of Bombay (Aurangabad Bench) dismissed NHAI's application seeking condonation of 833 days' delay in filing an appeal against a 2019 order. NHAI attributed the delay to administrative procedures including obtaining approvals from its regional office and legal consultants. The court rejected these reasons, holding that administrative convenience cannot justify such substantial delay, applying Supreme Court precedent that delays beyond the 90-day appeal period require compelling justification. Consequently, the underlying appeal was also dismissed. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Summary of CA 11309/2024 The High Court of Bombay (Aurangabad Bench) dismissed NHAI's application seeking condonation of 833 days' delay in filing an appeal against a 2019 order. NHAI attributed the delay to administrative procedures including obtaining approvals from its regional office and legal consultants. The court rejected these reasons, holding that administrative convenience cannot justify such substantial delay, applying Supreme Court precedent that delays beyond the 90-day appeal period require compelling justification. Consequently, the underlying appeal was also dismissed. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts