APHC010037162026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3524] THURSDAY,THE FIFTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI NATH TILHARI THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO: 327/2026 Between: 1. PROJECT DIRECTOR, NATIONAL HIGHWAYS AUTHORITY OF INDIA VIJAYAWADA, OFFICE AT PLOT NO 74, VANAMALI BUILDING, NEAR NAC KALYANA MANDAPAM, COMMERCIAL TAXES OFFICERS COLONY,VIJAYAWADA, NTR DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH, PIN CODE 520002 ...PETITIONER AND 1. CHENNU NAGESWARA RAO, S/O GOPAIAH, AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS R/O BAHUBALENDRAUNIGUDEM VILLAGE, GANNAVARAM MANDAL, KRISHNA DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH, PIN CODE 521102 2. THE COMPETENT AUTHORITY, (LAND ACQUISITION) REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, NUZVID, KRISHNA DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH, PIN CODE 521201 ...RESPONDENT(S): Petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, praying that in the circumstances stated in the grounds filed herein, the High Court may be pleased to set aside the order of attachment passed in E.P No. 664 of 2021 In AOP No 11/2013-2014 NH 5 dated 23-09-2025 by the learned XIII Additional District Judge at Vijayawada, NTR District, and pass IA NO: 1 OF 2026 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 grant stay of all further proceedings in pursuance of the order of attachment 2 passed in E.P No. 664 of 2021 in AOP No 11/2013-2014 NH 5 by the learned XIII Additional District Judge at Vijayawada, NTR District dated 23-09-2025 by the learned XIII Additional District Judge at Vijayawada pending disposal of the C.R.P and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. S S VARMA AND CO. Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. SAI GANGADHAR CHAMARTY ORDER: (per Hon’ble Sri Justice Ravi Nath Tilhari) This Civil Revision Petition has been filed under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, challenging the order dated 23.10.2025 (wrongly mentioned as 23.09.2025) passed in E.P.No.664 of 2021 in A.O.P. No.11 of 2013-2014/NH-5 on the file of the XIII Additional District and Sessions Judge, Vijayawada. 2. Heard Sri Akhil Krishnan, learned counsel representing Sri S.S.Varma, learned Standing Counsel for the National Highways Authority of India (NHAI), appearing for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondent/caveator. 3. With the consent of the parties’ counsels, this petition is being disposed of finally at this stage. 4. The competent authority under Section 3(a) of National Highways Act, 1956 passed an award in A.O.P.No.11/2013-2014/NH-5 dated 21.08.2013. The 1st respondent, not being satisfied, approached the 3 Arbitrator under Section 3G(5) of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act for enhancement of compensation and under Section 34 (2) of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act to set aside the award. 5. An arbitral Award dated 29.06.2019 was passed by the Arbitrator & Joint Collector-II, Krishna District, in favour of the 1st respondent herein and against the revision petitioner, enhancing the compensation in respect of the acquisition of certain extent of land for the widening of NH-16 (old NH-5). 6. Aggrieved from the Award dated 29.06.2019, the petitioner filed A.O.P. No.35 of 2021 on the file of the Principal District Judge, Krishna at Machilipatnam, under Section 34(2) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act along with an application seeking stay of execution of the Award under Section 34(5) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act. 7. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the stay application filed along with the petition under Section 34 of the Act, 1996 is still pending consideration. He submits that though the delay in filing the petition was condoned, the application for interim relief has not been disposed of till date. He further submits that, in the meantime, the 1st respondent filed E.P.No.664 of 2021 for execution of the Award, and in the said E.P., the impugned order dated 23.10.2025 has been passed. He submits that the Executing Court has taken the view that unless stay is granted, the execution proceedings can be continued. 4 8. The grievance raised is that, on the one hand the application seeking stay of the Award is pending consideration since 2021, which remains undisposed of, and on the other hand, the Award is being put to execution. 9. Considering the submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioner, we are of the considered view that, in terms of Section 36(2) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, an Award becomes executable unless stayed by an order of the Court. However, once an application seeking grant of stay of the Award is filed, the same is required to be considered and disposed of expeditiously, so as to balance the rights of both parties and to avoid rendering the proceedings under Section 34 of the Act, 1996 infructuous. 10. Accordingly, this Civil Revision Petition deserves to be disposed of, with a direction to the Principal District Judge, Krishna at Machilipatnam, to consider the application seeking stay of the Award dated 29.06.2019, and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law, after giving due opportunity of hearing to the 1st respondent herein, as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of four (04) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 5 11. Consequently, we dispose of the present civil revision petition with the following directions:- 1) The learned Principal District Judge, Krishna at Machilipatnam, shall consider and decide the application seeking stay of the award dated 29.06.2019 in A.O.P.No.35 of 2021, expeditiously and positively within a period of four (4) weeks, from the date of receipt of copy of this order, is produced before the learned Principal District Judge, Krishna at Machilipatnam. 2) Till disposal of the stay application, the further execution proceedings pursuant to the impugned Award and the impugned order dated 23.10.2025 shall remain stayed, subject to the condition that the petitioner deposits 1/3rd of the amount under execution, before the Executing Court within a period of two (02) weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this Order. 12. Learned counsel for the respondent/caveator submits that the respondent may be permitted to withdraw the 1/3rd amount to be deposited pursuant to this Order in the execution court and he places reliance on orders passed by this Court in C.R.P.No.2013 of 2025. In the said case, the said petition relief was given to the respondent to withdraw the 1/3rd amount pursuant to the order of the Court. We find that in the said case, the respondent therein had not received even the compensation amount under the award passed by the competent authority. In the present case, we asked the respondent’s counsel and he submits that the respondent has received the amount as awarded by the competent authority under the Act and it is only the enhanced amount under the award of the arbitrator that is pending payment. 6 Against the arbitration award, petition under Section 34 is pending. Consequently, the request to withdraw 1/3rd amount, to be deposited under this Order cannot be allowed at this stage. 13. No order as to costs. As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions, if any pending, shall also stand closed. ___________________ RAVI NATH TILHARI, J _____________________________ MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM, J GVK 7 103 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI NATH TILHARI AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.327 of 2026 Dt. 05.02.2026 GVK