KAPOOR SINGH AND OTHERS(Not Applicable) vs NHAI AND ANOTHER(Not Applicable) — ARB.C/21/2026

Case under Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 Section 24(4). Disposed: Contested--Allowed on 06th May 2026.

Case disposed

CNR: HPHC010837682025

Filing Number

ARB.C/71259/2025

Filing Date

30-Dec-2025

Registration No

ARB.C/21/2026

Registration Date

16-Jan-2026

Judge

Hon'ble Mr. Justice Virender Singh

Coram

Hon'ble Mr. Justice Virender Singh

Bench Type

Single

Judicial Branch

Civil Section

Decision Date

06-May-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--Allowed

Last updated 03-Jun-2026

Acts & Sections

Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 Section 24(4)

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.KAPOOR SINGH AND OTHERS(Not Applicable)

    Adv. Shashi Kiran,Bhavya,Bhavya, ,Bhavya

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.NHAI AND ANOTHER(Not Applicable)

    Adv. ,Shreya Chauhan,AG,Shreya Chauhan 1123

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 06-May-2026

    Hon'ble Mr. Justice Tarlok Singh Chauhan, Acting Chief Justice,hon'ble Mr. Justice Virender SinghView PDF

    The Himachal Pradesh High Court extended the arbitrator's mandate to conclude land acquisition proceedings by July 7, 2026, finding "sufficient cause" under Section 29A(5) of the Arbitration Act. The court held that administrative exigencies preventing the arbitrator (who is also Divisional Commissioner) from meeting the statutory 12-month deadline constituted cause beyond parties' control justifying post-expiry extension. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 19-Mar-2026

    Hon'ble Mr. Justice Virender SinghView PDF

  4. 19-Mar-2026

    Orders

    Hon'ble Mr. Justice Virender Singh

  5. 26-Feb-2026

    Hon'ble Mr. Justice Virender SinghView PDF

  6. 26-Feb-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  7. 30-Dec-2025

    Case filed

    Registration No. ARB.C/21/2026

casestatus.in Summary

The Himachal Pradesh High Court extended the arbitrator's mandate to conclude land acquisition proceedings by July 7, 2026, finding "sufficient cause" under Section 29A(5) of the Arbitration Act. The court held that administrative exigencies preventing the arbitrator (who is also Divisional Commissioner) from meeting the statutory 12-month deadline constituted cause beyond parties' control justifying post-expiry extension. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case