V. BHASKARA RAO, J.

( 1 ) THIS appeal is directed against the award and Judgment in MVOP. No. 450 of 1995 on the file of the Chairman, Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (District Judge), Warangal dated 26-7-1996 awarding compensation of rs. 35,000/- to the petitioner towards full satisfaction of the claim against the 3rd respondent-insurer, who is the appellant herein.

( 2 ) THE said MVOP has been dismissed against R-l driver, and R-2 owner of the tractor bearing No. AR 36-T 4008 and trailer bearing No. AP-3t-4009, which was involved in the accident.

( 3 ) SRI K. Subba Rao, learned Counsel for the appellant-insurer contended that Rl and R2 remained ex par te and the claim against themhasbeen dismissed by the learned Tribunal and when once the claim has been dismissed against the insured, there can be no liability against the insurer. In support of his contention he relied on a decision of the Supreme Court in Oriental Insurance company Ltd. vs. Sunita Rathi. It is further contended that the driver-R1 did not have a valid driving licence at the time of accident and as such an objection was raised and that the appellant had not agreed to settlement of the case at the Lok Adalat and hence the award under appeal is liable to be set aside.

( 4 ) SRI A. Prabhakar Rao, learned Counsel for the Respondent No. 1 -claimant contended that the impugned award is an award of Lok Adalat and no appeal lies against such an award under Section 21 (2) of the Legal Services Authorities act, 1987, for short the Act . He has brought on record that the Government. by G. O. Ms. No. 67, Law Department, dated. . 10-1995, framed Rules under the Act called A. P. State Legal Services Authority Rules 1995 and A. P. State legal Services Authority Regulations, 1996 and brought the provisions of the said Act into force. It is therefore, contended that the appeal is not maintainable in view of the express prohibition under Section 21 (2) of the Legal Services authority Act, 1987.

( 5 ) I have carefully perused the award under appeal and considered the rival contentions. Lok Adalats are constituted under Section 19 and procedure for cognizance of cases by Lok Adalats is prescribed by Section 20, and section 21 contemplates passing of award by Lok Adalat, and the nature of decree passed by Lok Adalat is that of a decree of Civil Court. Under sub- section (2) of Sec. 21 appeal is barred. That is the law in vogue as on the date of passing of the award under appeal.

( 6 ) SRI K. Subba Rao, learned Counsel has pointed out that the award under appeal has not been passed by Lok Adalat. He has demonstrated that fact by taking me through the award under appeal on the one hand and also by showing a copy of the award passed by the Lok Adalat at Karimnagar in O. P. No. 47/1996 dated 31-1-1997 on the other.

( 7 ) I closely examined both these awards and I find that there is any amount of difference between both these awards. Award passed by the Lok Adalat of Karimnagar contains the coram constituting the Bench. At the very inception of the award, the names of Sri Asgar Hussain, Judicial Member, Sri b. Venkateswar, Advocate and II Member and Sri C. Ramesh Sagar, Advocate and III Member are stated and thereafter award runs into two pages. It bears the signatures of the members constituting the coram as well as the petitioner by name Najeeb Sultana on one side and respondent Anwar Begum on another side and the learned Counsel appearing on both the parties. The format of this award is said to have been prescribed by the rules framed under the Act. Then turning to award passed by the MVOP Tribunal, Warangal. It reads that it is passed by Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (District Judge), Warangal and the officer present is shown as Sri N. Vidya Prasad, B. Sc, B. L. , Chairman, motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (District Judge) Warangal. The award does not bear the signatures of the parties or their Counsel and on the contrary it is signed by the District Judge, Warangal and it bears t

Click Here to Read the rest of this document