Uttarakhand High Court Directs Sole Arbitrator to Expedite Conclusion of Arbitration Pending Since 2020 Under the National Highways Act, 1956, Citing Clear Mandate of Section 29-A of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act for Timely Resolution

Court’s Decision:
The Uttarakhand High Court, while addressing a writ petition, directed the expeditious conclusion of an arbitration case under Section 3(G)(5) of the National Highways Act, 1956. The court ordered that the arbitration, which has been pending since 2020, be decided within three months from the date of production of the court’s order.

Facts:
The petitioners approached the court seeking a direction for the expedited hearing of an arbitration case that has been pending since 2020 before the District Magistrate, Udham Singh Nagar, acting as the sole arbitrator. The arbitration pertains to a dispute involving the Project Director of the National Highway Authority of India.

Issues:
The primary issue was whether the arbitration proceedings, delayed since 2020, should be expedited under the provisions of Section 29-A of the Arbitration and Conciliation (Amendment) Act, 2019, which mandates the conclusion of arbitration within a specific time frame.

Petitioner’s Arguments:
The petitioners argued that under Section 29-A of the Arbitration and Conciliation (Amendment) Act, 2019, arbitration proceedings should be concluded within 12 months. They emphasized that this provision is applicable to the arbitration under the National Highways Act, 1956, and requested the court to issue a directive for the swift resolution of the pending arbitration.

Respondent’s Arguments:
The respondents did not oppose the petitioners’ request for expediting the arbitration and acknowledged the applicability of Section 29-A of the Arbitration and Conciliation (Amendment) Act, 2019.

Analysis of the Law:
The court analyzed the applicability of Section 29-A of the Arbitration and Conciliation (Amendment) Act, 2019, which requires the conclusion of arbitration within 12 months from the completion of pleadings. The court noted that this provision is relevant to the arbitration in question, which had been pending since 2020.

Precedent Analysis:
The court referred to the provisions of Section 29-A but did not cite any specific case law or precedent. The analysis was limited to the statutory interpretation of the Arbitration and Conciliation (Amendment) Act, 2019.

Court’s Reasoning:
The court reasoned that, given the delay in arbitration proceedings and the absence of opposition from the respondents, it was appropriate to direct the sole arbitrator to expedite the conclusion of the case. The court found that Section 29-A was clear in its mandate for timely resolution of arbitration cases.

Conclusion:
The court allowed the writ petition and directed the respondent (the District Magistrate, Udham Singh Nagar, acting as sole arbitrator) to conclude and decide the arbitration case within three months from the date of production of the court’s order. All pending applications were also disposed of.

Implications:
This judgment emphasizes the court’s stance on ensuring timely resolution of arbitration proceedings, particularly under statutory provisions such as Section 29-A. It sets a precedent for enforcing the timelines prescribed under the Arbitration and Conciliation (Amendment) Act, 2019, in similar cases involving public authorities like the National Highways Authority of India.

Also Read – Uttarakhand High Court Permits Application for Revocation of GST Registration Cancellation: Orders Petitioner to Furnish All Pending Returns, Pay Outstanding Dues, Penalties, and Late Fees to Seek Reinstatement of GST Registration