Allahabad High Court
MOHD. HASANversusUNION OF INDIA AND 2 OTHERS
- Decided
- Bench
- VIKAS BUDHWAR
Holding
The petition is disposed, with the court holding that withdrawal of the execution case merges interim orders with the final order, though the petitioner may still question the order.
Summary
The petitioner challenged a direction issued in an execution proceeding that required the court to seek clarification from the arbitrator on the interest component of an award under Section 3G(5) of the National Highway Act. The execution case had been withdrawn by the petitioner on 31‑03‑2026, and the court noted that any interim orders would merge with the final order upon withdrawal. The court observed that the petitioner remains free to question the order but ultimately disposed of the petition. No fresh execution proceedings were ordered, though liberty to file one was granted if needed. The petition was therefore dismissed.
Issues considered
- Whether the direction to the executing court to obtain clarification from the arbitrator on the interest component is maintainable after the execution case has been withdrawn
Legislation cited
- National Highway Act — s. 3G(5)
Subjects
- land acquisition
- arbitration
- execution proceedings
- TDS
- interest clarification
- National Highway Act
- Article 227
- High Court
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 5790 of 2026
Mohd. Hasan
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus
Union Of India And 2 Others
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Tanishk Goyal
Counsel for Respondent(s) : A.S.G.I., C.S.C., Pranjal Mehrotra
Court No. - 5
HON'BLE VIKAS BUDHWAR, J.
1. Heard Ms. Anjali Goklani (AoR A/A 0379/2019) holding brief of Sri
Tanishk Goyal, learned counsel for the plaintiff-petitioner and Sri Pranjal
Mehrotra for respondent.
2. The grievance of the plaintiff-petitioner is that consequent to the
acquisition proceedings so initiated, the land was acquired and the matter
travelled before the Additional Commissioner-II/Arbitrator, Moradabad
Mandal, Moradabad in the proceedings under Section 3G(5) of the National
Highway Act and an award came to be passed. An execution application also
came to be preferred by the claimant in which on 11.03.2026, an order came
to be passed whereby a direction was issued that within a period of one
week, the amount which has been deducted as TDS be returned with a
further direction that with regard to the interest component, the arbitrator
was directed to specify/clarify the same.
3. Questioning the said order insofar as it pertains to the direction of the
executing court for getting clarification from the arbitrator with respect to
the interest component, the present petition has been preferred.
4. However, the Court finds that the Execution Case No. 1 of 2025 stands
withdrawn by the petitioner herein on 31.03.2026, however, liberty has been
accorded to file a fresh execution proceedings, in case, the same stands
occasioned. Once, the execution case itself stands withdrawn then any order
passed in the interregnum during the pendency will merge with the final
order.
5. Be that as it may, it is always open to the plaintiff-petitioner to question
A227 No. 5790 of 2026
2
the order which has been passed against the petitioner.
6. With the aforesaid observation, the petition stands disposed of.
May 6, 2026
Rajesh
(Vikas Budhwar,J.)
Digitally signed by :-
RAJESH KUMAR
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…