P. SATHASIVAM, J. CHELAMESWAR
K. N. Govindan Kutty Menon – Appellant
Versus
C. D. Shaji – Respondent
Certainly. Based on the provided legal document, here are the key points:
Please let me know if you need further clarification or assistance.
JUDGMENT
P. Sathasivam, J.
1) Leave granted.
2) This appeal raises an important question as to the interpretation of Section 21 of the Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987 (in short ‘the Act’). The question posed for consideration is that when a criminal case filed under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 referred to by the Magistrate Court to Lok Adalat is settled by the parties and an award is passed recording the settlement, can it be considered as a decree of a civil court and thus executable?
3) This appeal is directed against the final judgment and order dated 24.11.2009 passed by the High Court of Kerala at Ernakulam in Writ Petition (C) No. 33013 of 2009 whereby the High Court dismissed the petition filed by the appellant herein.
4) Brief facts:
(a) The appellant herein filed a complaint being C.C. No. 1216 of 2007 before the Judicial Ist Class Magistrate Court No.1, Ernakulam against the respondent herein under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (in short ‘the N.I. Act’). The Magistrate referred the said complaint to the Ernakulam District Legal Service Authority for trying the case for settlement between the parties in the Lok Adalat.
(b)
Bhavnagar University vs. Palitana Sugar Mill (P) Ltd. and Others, (2003) 2 SCC 111
P.T. Thomas vs. Thomas Job, (2005) 6 SCC 478
State of Punjab & Anr. vs. Jalour Singh and Ors. (2008) 2 SCC 660
Ittianam and Others vs. Cherichi @ Padmini (2010) 8 SCC 612
B.P. Moideen Sevamandir and Anr. vs. A.M. Kutty Hassan (2009) 2 SCC 198
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.