NHAI Vs. Kushal Singh & Ors. OMP(M) No.134/2024 06.11.2025 Present: Ms. Sneh Bhimta, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Aditya Chauhan, Advocate, vice counsel, for respondent No.2 to 7. OMP(M) No.99 & 105 of 2025 These two applications have been moved by the applicant/appellant for bringing on record legal heirs of deceased respondent No.1 with a prayer for condoning the delay in moving the application to bring them on record. The proposed legal heirs of deceased respondent No.1 stand served. They have chosen not to put in appearance and have been proceeded against ex-parte. Learned counsel for the appearing respondents has no objection for allowing both the applications. 2. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and on going through the applications, I am of the considered view that delay in making the application to bring on record legal heirs of deceased respondent No.1 has been sufficiently and cogently explained. 3. Accordingly, both the applications are allowed. Legal heirs of deceased-respondent No.1 are ordered to be brought on record as respondents No.1 (a) to 1(d) in the array of parties after condoning the delay in moving the application (OMP(M) No. 105/2025) to bring them on record. Amended memo of parties is taken on record. Applications to stand disposed of. OMP(M) No.134/2024 4. Applicant/appellant seeks condonation of 154 days’ delay in instituting the main appeal. The applicant has pleaded that the impugned judgment was pronounced by the learned District Judge on 04.09.2023. Its certified copy was applied on 06.09.2023. The same was attested on 30.09.2023 and was received on 07.10.2023. However, disposal of the case on 04.09.2023 was not within the knowledge of the applicant as the same was never intimated to it by its counsel. 5. The application is with the further averments that the applicant became aware on 21.03.2024 about the disposal of the main case on 04.09.2023. On account of closing of the financial year, the empanelled counsel for the applicant throughout the State of H.P. were directed to furnish the information of the pendency or otherwise of the cases of the appellant. That it is only thereafter the applicant came to know about the fact that the instant case had been disposed of on 04.09.2023. However, this fact was not brought to the notice of the applicant by its counsel. 6. The applicant further submits that due to such inefficient and lackadaisical attitude of the said law firm/counsel, M/s M.V. Kini & Co., 362 cases pending in District Mandi have been withdrawn and had been allotted to some other firm. 7. The reasons for delay in filing the appeal have been attributed upon having no information about disposal of the case from the counsel conducting the said case. The applicant has demonstrated its bona fide by pleading that it has already withdrawn its cases from the law firm conducting the aforesaid cases. 8. Even otherwise, there is no opposition to the prayer made in the application. For the cogent reasons given and established in the application, the delay in filing the main appeal is condoned. The application stands disposed of. Arb. Appeal No. of 2025 9. Be registered. List for consideration after four weeks. OMP No.625 of 2025 Be registered. 10. Heard. Subject to deposit of entire awarded amount alongwith up to date interest in the Registry of this Court within four weeks, operation and execution of order dated 04.09.2023, passed by the learned District Judge Bilaspur, H.P. in Arbitration Case No.59 of 2018 (National Highways Authority of India Versus Khushal Singh and others), shall remain stayed. The application stands disposed of. OMP No. 609/2025 The application is disposed of with a direction to the applicant/petitioner to file translated copy of the documents in issue before the next date of hearing. Jyotsna Rewal Dua Judge 6th November, 2025 (Rohit)