Gauhati High Court
I.A.(Civil)/52/2026 of National Highways and Infrastructure Development Corporation Ltd. (NHIDCL) and Anr. Vs Sh. T.K. Thanga and Anr. on 28 June 2026
GAHC030001522026 THE GAUHATI
GAHC030001522026
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : I.A.(Civil)/52/2026
National Highways and Infrastructure Development Corporation Ltd. (NHIDCL) and Anr.
Ministry of Road Transport and Highways, Government of India, represented by Managing Director (P), NHIDCL HQ, First Floor, Tower A, World Trade Center, Nauroji Nagar, New Delhi-110029
2: The General Manager (P
VERSUS
Sh. T.K. Thanga and Anr.
R/o Rengtekawn, Kolasib District
2:Competent Authority for Land Acquisitio Advocate for the Petitioner : Mr. Shubham Paliwal Advocate for the Respondent : Mr J C Lalnunsanga for R1
BEFORE
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MICHAEL ZOTHANKHUMA
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORDER
Date : 29-06-2026 Heard Mr. Shubham Paliwal, learned counsel for the applicants. Also heard Mr. J.C. Lalnunsanga, learned counsel for the respondent No. 1 and Mr. Jonathan Lalrintluanga, learned counsel for the respondent No. 2.
2. This is an application for condoning the delay of 38 days in filing the appeal under Section 37 of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996 against the impugned Judgment & Order dated 03.11.2025, passed by the learned Additional District & Sessions Judge, Kolasib, in Arbitration Petition No. 2/2025.
3. The applicants’ counsel submits that after the passing of the impugned Judgment & Order dated 03.11.2025, the applicants applied for a certified copy, which was received on 23.02.2026. Thereafter, the delay arose due to coordination and obtaining approvals between its office in Kolasib District and Aizawl District of the NHIDCL. The time taken for obtaining the opinion of the counsel and drafting of the memorandum of appeal also took some time. As such, a delay of 38 days, which was unintentional, had occurred.
4. The counsel for the respondent No. 1 has filed his affidavit objecting to the delay being condoned, on the ground that the Judgment & Order dated 03.11.2025 passed by the learned Additional District & Sessions Judge, Kolasib, in Arbitration Petition No. 2/2025, had been accepted by the NHIDCL and they had even made a prayer for granting them extension of time to make the payment of compensation. However, they have now turned around and made a challenge to the order passed by the learned Additional District & Sessions Judge, Kolasib, only on the ground that the land of the respondent No. 1 could not have accommodated an additional 1257 Betel Nut trees, over and above the 743 trees, for which compensation had been provided by the Arbitrator.
5. I have heard the learned counsels for the parties.
6. On considering the reasons given by the applicant for condoning the delay, this Court finds that though the applicants had initially accepted the impugned Judgment & Order dated 03.11.2025, the learned Court had taken a very long time in providing the certified copy of the impugned Judgment & Order. As such, this Court is of the view that the delay should be condoned. Accordingly, the delay of 38 days is condoned.
7. I.A. stands disposed of.
JUDGE Comparing Assistant