1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. Arb. Appeal No. 139 of 2026 Decided on: 1.4.2026 National Highways Authority of India ...Applicant. Versus Shyam Lal & others Non-applicants. Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Virender Singh, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the Applicants: Ms. Shreya Chauhan, Advocate. For the Non-applicants: Mr. Umesh Kanwar, Advocate, for respondents No. 1, 3, 4 and 5. Virender Singh, Judge (Oral) OMP(M) No. 249 of 2024 The applicant has preferred the accompanying Appeal, under Section 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1966, against order dated 20.1.2024, passed by the Court of learned District Judge, Bilaspur, H.P. (hereinafter referred to as ‘the trial Court’) in Arbitration Petition No. 82 of 2019, titled as ‘NHAI versus Shyam Lal & others’. 1 Whether the reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes. 2. In the present case, OMP(M) No. 509 of 2025 has been moved with a prayer to bring on record the LRs of respondent No. 2, Parma Nand, S/o Nikku Ram. As per the application, Parma Nand has expired on 20.11.2021, leaving behind his LRs, as mentioned in para-3 of the application, when, the lis was pending before the learned trial Court. Meaning thereby, the judgment has been passed against a dead person. 3. In the peculiar facts and circumstances of the present case, delay in filing the present appeal is condoned and the application is disposed of. Arb. Appeal No. 139 of 2026 4. It is no longer res-integra that judgment/award, passed in favour of/against the dead person is nullity. The Hon’ble Apex Court in ‘Gurnam Singh (Dead) through Legal Representatives & Others versus Gurbachan Kaur (Dead) by Legal Representatives’ (2017) 13 SCC 414, has observed, in para No.21, as under:- “It is a fundamental principle of law laid down by this Court in Kiran Singh’s case (supra) that a decree passed by the Court, if it is a nullity, its validity can be questioned in any proceeding including in execution proceedings or even in collateral proceedings whenever such decree is sought to be enforced by the decree holder. The reason is that the defect of 2 this nature affects the very authority of the Court in passing such decree and goes to the root of the case. This principle, in our considered opinion, squarely applies to this case because it is a settled principle of law that the decree passed by a Court for or against a dead person is a ‘nullity’.” 5. In view of the above, this Court has left with no option, but to set aside the judgment dated 20.1.2024, passed by the learned trial Court, in Arbitration No. 82 of 2019, titled as, ‘National Highways Authority of India versus Shyam Lal & others, and to remand the matter back to the said Court, for fresh disposal, in accordance with law. 6. Since, the lis is pending between the parties from the year 2019, as such, it is expected from learned trial Court to decide the question of abatement expeditiously, preferably within a period of six months, from the date of receipt of the record. 7. With these observations, the present appeal is disposed of by setting aside the judgment dated 20.1.2024, passed by the learned trial Court. 8. Parties through their counsel are directed to appear before the learned trial Court on 1.6.2026. 9. Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of. 3 10. Record be sent back immediately. ( Virender Singh ) Judge April 1, 2026 (kalpana) 4