IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI FRIDAY, THE TWENTY FIRST DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE R RAGHUNANDAN RAO^^^HO?^ AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO: 3190 OF 2024 Petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, aggrieved by the orders passed in lA.No.78/2023, in Arb.O.P.No.116 of 2020, Dt.06.11.2024 on the file of Ld. Trial Court / VIII Additional District Judge, Chittoor. Between; 1. Inti Manohar Naidu, aged 61 years, S/o Late Srihari Naidu, residing at D.No.6-1, Sai Nagar, Madanapalle road, Palamaner, Gangavaram Mandal, Chittoor District. 2. M.Mohan Kumar, aged 54 years, S/o K.Muniraju residing at Ramarao Upper Primary High School, Prakasham street, Kothapeta Madanapalle, Annamayya District. near ...Petitioners/Petitioners AND 1. The District Collector Cum Arbitrator for NH Cases, New Collectorate Premises, Vellore Road, Gangasagaram, Chittoor. 2. The Joint Collector cum Competent Authority, Chittoor Collectorate Premises, Vellore road, Gangasagaram, Chittoor 3. The Tahsildar, Gangavaram Mandal, Back side of Gangavaram station, Gangavaram, Chittoor District. 4. The Project Director, NH Authority Act., D.No.23-3-39-501, 5th Floor, Dhanalakshmi Nagar, Vykuntapuram Road, M.R.Palli, Tirupathi. ...Respondents/Respondents Police lA NO: 1 OF 2024 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to stay of all further proceedings in Arb.OP.No.116 of 2020 pending on the file of Ld. VIII Additional District Judge, Chittoor disposal of the present CRP. Counsel for the Petitioners: SRI JITENDRA KANYALUR Counsel for the Respondents: None Appeared The Court made the following: ORDER pending 1 APHC010578742024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3488] ,THE__aT?^L_ day of FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE R RAGHUNANDAN RAO THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO: 3190/2024 Between: ...PETITIONER(S) Inti Manohar Naidu and Others AND ...RESPONDENT{S) The District Collector Cum Arbitrator For Nh Cases and Others Counsel for the Petitloner(S): 1.JITENDRA KANYALUR Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. The Court made the following order; (per Hon’ble Sri Justice R. Raghunandan Rao) A part of the land of the petitioners situated in Sy.No.518/2A and 524/5B of Gangavaram Village was acquired, for the purpose of widening of National Highway No.4, under the Provisions of National Highways Act. The petitioners being dissatisfied, with the compensation fixed for them, have invoked arbitration. The petitioners being aggrieved, by the award of the Arbitrator, moved Arb.O.P.No.116 of 2020, for setting aside the Award, dated 17.01.2020, under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 before the District Judge, Chittoor. 2. The petitioners have moved I.A.No.78 of 2023, for appointment of an Advocate Commissioner, to measure the distance from the schedule property and a property which was the subject matter of a deed of sale, dated 22.08.2015, which was registered as Document No.3201 of 2015 and for measuring the distance from the scheduled land to Palamaner Municipality along the main road of the Bangalore-Chennai Highway. This application was rejected by the trial Court, by an order dated 06.11.2024. The trial Court took the view that the scope of review, under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, would not extend to a reassessment of the material before the Arbitral Tribunal and the exercise of an Advocate Commissioner being appointed, for measuring the distances, would not aid the petitioners in any manner, in relation to challenging the award, under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. 3. Aggrieved by the said order, the petitioners have moved the present Civil Revision Petition. Sri K. Jitendra, learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the Arbitrator ought to have measured these distances and the lapse on the part of the Arbitrator to carry out such measurements would amount to violation of principles of natural justice apart from being an arbitrary action which can be challenged, under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act. Learned counsel for the petitioners would also submit that permitting such 4. 3 measurement would meet the ends of justice as it would demonstrate that the contention of the petitioners that the Arbitrator should have taken into account the value of land fixed under the aforesaid deed of sale would also be applicable to the land of the petitioners due to their proximity. It was always open to the petitioners to have requested for such 5. measurements before the Arbitrator. The contention that the Arbitrator had a responsibility to carry out such measurements is misplaced. Consequently, the contention that there was a lapse on the part of the Arbitrator in taking such measurements cannot be accepted. As rightly pointed out by the trial Court, the scope of review. 6. under Section 34 of the Arbitration Act, is limited to the grounds set out therein. A reappreciation of evidence or forming an opinion which can be at variance from the view of the Arbitrator would not be sufficient for setting aside the award passed by such an Arbitrator. In such circumstances there would be no purpose in taking such measurements. Accordingly, this Civil Revision Petition is dismissed. There shall 7. be no order as to costs. As a sequel, pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. Sd/- N NAGAMMA ASSISTANT REGISTRY //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To, VIII Additional District Judge, Chittoor, Chittoor District. Sri Jitendra Kanyalur Advocate [OPUC] 3. The Section Officer, V.R Section, High Court of Andhra Pradesh. 4. Three CD Copies 1. The 2. One CC to Q AX/V S ■ HIGH COURT DATED;21/02/2025 ORDER CRP.No.3190 of 2024 AND/y/g^, X 0 5 MAR 2n?5 ^ . Curreni oecuun c». DISMISSING THE CIVIL REVISION PETITION WITHOUT COSTS L