( 2025:HHC:27343 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. OMP(M) No.58 of 2025 Decided on: 13th August, 2025 National Highway Authority of India ..Applicant/Appellant versus Mohar Singh and others ...Respondents Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Satyen Vaidya, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the applicant: Ms.Shreya Chauhan, Advocate. For the respondents: Mr. Ashok Kumar Sharma, Advocate. Satyen Vaidya, Judge (Oral) OMP(M) No. 58 of 2025. Heard. 2. No reply is sought to be filed. 3. The delay of 167 days in filing the appeal has been sought to be condoned by the applicant/appellant on the ground that initially there has been some delay in communication of the factum of decision in the case and subsequently reasonable time was taken for seeking necessary opinion for filing of instant appeal. 4. Since, there is no opposition to the averments made in the application coupled with the fact that the said averments are duly supported by an affidavit of the competent officer, there is 1 Whether the reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes. ( 2025:HHC:27343 ) 2 nothing before this Court to disbelieve the reasons assigned for condonation of delay. 5. Accordingly, the application is allowed and the delay in filing the appeal is condoned. Arbitration Appeal No. of 2025. 6. Appeal be registered. 7. Notice to the respondents. Mr. Ashok Kumar Sharma, learned counsel waives service of notice. 8. The instant appeal has been filed against the order dated 13.06.2024 passed by the learned District Judge, Bilaspur in Arbitration Case No. 174 of 2023, whereby the application for condonation of delay, filed by the appellant herein, in filing the objections under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act has been dismissed. 9. The impugned order reveals that the application for condonation of delay was filed under Section 5 of the Limitation Act by the appellant herein beyond the period prescribed under Section 34(3) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. From the grounds of appeal also it is not suggested that such findings of fact are incorrect. That being so, no fault can be found in the impugned order passed by the learned District Judge, Bilaspur, as it is well settled that the delay beyond the period prescribed under Section 34(3) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act cannot be condoned by any authority or Court. ( 2025:HHC:27343 ) 3 10. In result, there is no merit in the instant appeal and the same is dismissed. 11. Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of. August 13, 2025 ( Satyen Vaidya ) (naveen) Judge