Quick Summary: A land dispute in Thane has been stuck in legal complications for over four years, with arbitration proceedings not progressing due to changes in arbitrators and procedural issues.
In Village Dalkhan, Shahapur, Thane, land owned by Rural Infrastructure Development Private Limited was taken over under the Maharashtra Highways Act, 1955. The compensation offered was Rs. 510 per square meter, totaling Rs. 2.91 Crores. Unhappy with this, the landowners asked for arbitration to get a higher rate of Rs. 13,170 per square meter.
Even though the arbitration request was made in April 2021, no decision was made within the legal deadline. The process was delayed further when the Maharashtra government changed the arbitrator twice, first in December 2023 and again in April 2025, without asking the involved parties.
"The arbitration proceedings have been pending for over four years without resolution," noted the court.
The landowners' lawyers, Mr. Mayur Khandeparkar and Mr. Vivek Punjabi, argued that the current arbitrator's authority had run out, and a new one should be appointed. However, the state’s lawyer, Ms. Irra Dube-Patil, argued that only the state government could appoint an arbitrator, not the High Court.
Justice Somasekhar Sundaresan pointed out the lack of progress in the case, stressing that the law aims for quick resolutions. The court noted that the state’s repeated changes of arbitrators without any progress went against the purpose of the arbitration laws.
The court decided that the current arbitration panel's authority had expired because of delays. It instructed the landowners to go to the appropriate court in Navi Mumbai to appoint a new arbitrator, making sure the arbitration process follows the legal rules.
"The legislative policy choice of arbitration is meant for faster closure, which stands frustrated in this case," the judge remarked.
The case shows the difficulties in arbitration processes, especially when there are delays and questions about who has the right to make decisions. The court's decision aims to help resolve the issue while respecting the legal rules and the landowners' rights.
