In National Highways Authority of India v. Soma Enterprises Ltd., the Delhi High Court considered whether a petition filed under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 challenging an arbitral award continued to survive after the Supreme Court’s decision in Prakash Atlanta (JV) v. National Highways Authority of India. The petition had been instituted by the National Highways Authority of India (NHAI) seeking to set aside an arbitral award dated 16 January 2017. During the course of proceedings, NHAI sought time to examine the impact of the Supreme Court’s subsequent ruling, which directly governed the issues involved in the dispute. Upon instructions, counsel appearing for NHAI informed the High Court that in view of the Supreme Court’s judgment, the challenge to the arbitral award no longer survived and the petition had become infructuous. It was further brought to the Court’s notice that the bank guarantee furnished by Soma Enterprises Ltd. had already been returned, leaving no subsisting controversy between the parties. Accepting these submissions, the Delhi High Court observed that no useful purpose would be served by continuing the proceedings, as the dispute had effectively been resolved by the binding precedent of the Supreme Court. Accordingly, the Court disposed of the Section 34 petition as infructuous without examining the merits of the arbitral award. The decision highlights the binding effect of subsequent Supreme Court rulings on pending arbitration challenges and illustrates how such developments can render ongoing proceedings unnecessary where no live dispute remains.

Legal Issue
Whether the petition under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 challenging the arbitral award dated 16.01.2017 survived after the Supreme Court's decision in Prakash Atlanta (JV) v. National Highways Authority of India, 2026 SCC OnLine SC 98.

Brief Facts
The National Highways Authority of India (NHAI) had filed a petition under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 challenging an arbitral award dated 16 January 2017. During the proceedings, the petitioner sought time to obtain instructions following the Supreme Court's judgment in Prakash Atlanta (JV) v. NHAI, which had a direct bearing on the controversy. On 17 July 2026, counsel for NHAI informed the Court that, in light of the Supreme Court's ruling, the petition had become infructuous and would not be pursued. It was also stated that the bank guarantee furnished by the respondent had already been returned.

Court’s Reasoning
The Court accepted the petitioner's submission that the Supreme Court's judgment had rendered the challenge to the arbitral award infructuous. Since the petitioner no longer wished to prosecute the matter and the bank guarantee had already been returned to the respondent, no surviving dispute required adjudication.

Judgment
The Delhi High Court disposed of the petition as infructuous, holding that no cause survived for adjudication.

Subsequent Development
The order records that the bank guarantee had already been returned to the respondent. No further directions were issued.

Access the full Judgment/Order here

Case Title
National Highways Authority of India v. Soma Enterprises Ltd.

Neutral Citation
O.M.P. (COMM) 224/2017, Order dated 17 July 2026

Court
High Court of Delhi

Bench
Justice Om Prakash Shukla