Neutral Citation No. ( 2025:HHC:28522 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA OMP(M) No. 45 of 2025. Date of decision: 21.08.2025. National Highway Authority of India …..Applicant/Appellant. Versus Tulsi Ram (deceased) through his LRs Sudesh Kumar and others …..Respondents. Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Satyen Vaidya, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the Applicant/ : Ms. Shreya Chauhan, Advocate. Appellant. For the Respondents : Mr. Ashok Kumar Sharma, Advocate. Satyen Vaidya, Judge ( Oral ) OMP(M) Nos.333 and 334 of 2025. Issue notice to the legal representatives of deceased- respondent, as detailed in para-1 of OMP(M) No.333 of 2025. 2. Mr. Ashok Kumar Sharma, Advocate, appears and waives service of notice on behalf of respondents. Learned counsel for the non-applicant/appellant has no objection in granting the prayer made in the application. Accordingly, the application is allowed. The legal representatives of deceased-respondent, as detailed in para-1 of OMP(M) No. 333 of 2025, are ordered to be 1Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the Judgment?Yes 2 Neutral Citation No. ( 2025:HHC:28522 ) brought on record, as respondents No.1(a) to 1(c), after condoning the delay in filing the application. Both the applications are disposed of. 3. Amended memo of parties is ordered to be taken on record. OMP(M) No. 45 of 2025. 4. By way of this application, a prayer has been made for condonation of delay of 258 days in filing the appeal under Section 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. 5. Mr. Ashok Kumar Sharma, Advocate, has put in appearance for the respondents and has stated that his clients have no objection in case this application is allowed. 6. I have gone through the contents of the application which is duly supported by an affidavit of a competent Officer. Since, there is no rebuttal to the contents of the application, there is nothing before this Court to disbelieve the averments made therein. 7. Accordingly, the application is allowed and the delay in filing the appeal is condoned. Arbitration Appeal No. of 2025. 8. Appeal be registered. 9. Notice to the respondents. Mr. Ashok Kumar Sharma, learned counsel waives service of notice. 3 Neutral Citation No. ( 2025:HHC:28522 ) 10. The instant appeal has been filed against the order dated 13.06.2024 passed by the learned District Judge, Bilaspur, in Arbitration Case No. 162 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. 11. 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. 12. In result, there is no merit in the instant appeal and the same is dismissed. 13. Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of. (Satyen Vaidya) Judge 21st August, 2025. (krt)