IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI
C. PRAVEEN KUMAR, B.V.L.N. CHAKRAVARTHI, JJ.
S. Elumalai, S/o. Shanmugam - Appellant
Versus
The Lok Adalat Bench, Puttur, through Mandal Legal Services Committee & Ors. - Respondents
Writ Petition No. 34237 of 2022
Decided On : 08-11-2022
Constitution of India, 1949 – Article 226 – Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 – Section 195 and Chapter XXVI – Civil Procedure Code, 1908 – Order VI, Rule 4 – Legal Services Authority Act, 1987 – Section 20, 21, 22 – Indian Contract Act, 1872 – Section 17 – Fraud Defined – Power of High courts to issue certain writs – Award of Lok Adalat – Power of Lok Adalat or Permanent Lok Adalat – Writ petition is filed seeking a Writ of Certiorari to exercise extraordinary original jurisdiction vested in High Court by virtue of Lok Adalt Bench, Puttur file of Senior Civil Judge, Puttur as illegal, improper without jurisdiction and against procedure established by law, contrary, contrary to Legal Services Authority Act and rules – Consequently to set aside same – Held, Court to establish alleged fraud played by second respondent against petitioner – Court Mandal Legal Services Committee ingredients of fraud as required such disputed question of fact cannot be decided by this Court in writ petition – Allegations are vague, and not supported by any cogent proof – Mere allegations – Averments of facts do not make a strong prima facie case of fraud – Petitioner award passed by Lok Adalat filed Writ petition with vague allegations respondent played fraud on petitioner as well as Lok Adalat Bench, Puttur – Petitioner without taking any action against his wife her brother – Advocate who appeared on his behalf before Lok Adalat Bench – Writ petition making feeble allegations of fraud against them which are not sufficient to establish fraud as alleged by him – Writ petition dismissed.
ORDER :
B.V.L.N. Chakravarthi, J.
This writ petition is filed seeking a Writ of Certiorari to exercise the extraordinary original jurisdiction vested in the High Court by virtue of Article 226 of the Constitution of India to declare the award dated 08.02.2020 passed by the Lok Adalt Bench, Puttur in O.S.No.24 of 2019 on the file of the Senior Civil Judge, Puttur as illegal, improper, without jurisdiction and against the procedure established by law, contrary, contrary to the Legal Services Authority Act and rules thereon and consequently to set aside the same.
2. The facts leading to the filing of this writ petition are as under :
The wife, daughter, and son who are the respondents Nos.2 to 4 in the Writ Petition, filed a suit in O.S.No.24 of 2019 on the file of Senior Civil Judge, Puttur against the writ petitioner here in to pass a decree and judgment in their favour and against the writ petitioner to pay a sum of Rs.20,50,000/- out of the voluntary retirement benefits received by the writ petitioner, towards their maintenance alleging that the marriage between the 2nd respondent, and the writ petitioner took place on 10.09.2000 at Sri Subramanyaswamy temple, Puttur Town, and during their wedlock the respondents 3 and 4 were born, and the writ petitioner is working as a Government School Teacher and has got a defective eyesight, but he can see things at a close distance, and for the past three years there is a lot of change in the attitude of the writ petitioner, and he was causing insecurity and problem of privacy to inmates of the house and the 2nd respondent raised protest as there are grown up children are in the house, but the writ petitioner did not feel the seriousness of the situation and on the other hand he started blaming respondents 2 & 3, and the friends of the defendant were entering into the house in drunken condition, and he started neglecting respondents 2 to 4, and stopped securing provisions to the house and was beating respondents 2 to 4 and his spoiled the study atmosphere in the house, and drinking urine in front of the wife and children under guise of health care, and proclaiming that the wife, children should not stop him, and having no other go they reached the house of the mother of the 2nd respondent at Puttur and on 04.05.2019 they reported the matter to women Police Arakonam and issued a legal notice on 27.05.2019 to the writ petitioner, and he issued a reply notice dated 06.06.2019 making false allegations and having no other go they filed PLP.No.33 of 2019 on the file of Lok Adalat, Puttur, but the writ petitioner did not appear before the Lok Adalat, and conveniently applied for voluntary retirement and that the respondents 2 to 4 are unable to maintain themselves, and they are with the mother of the 2nd respondent at Puttur, and they demanded the writ petitioner to pay maintenance for their sustenance and the education of the children, but he did not pay any amount and on the other hand applied for voluntary retirement to avoid the maintenance and having no other go they filed a suit in the court of Senior Civil Judge, Puttur for Rs.20,50,000/-.
3. While the suit was pending before the Senior Civil Judge, Puttur, the parties entered into compromise and to record compromise, at the request of both the parties, the Mandal Legal Services Committees referred O.S.No.24 of 2019 for settlement under Section 20 of the Legal Services Authority Act, 1987. The terms of compromise were reduced to writing. Placed before the Mandal Legal Services Committee, requesting to record compromise, and in view of the settlement, they appeared before the Mandal Legal Services Committee, duly signed by the writ petitioner and respondent 2 to 4. In terms of the compromise, award dated 08.02.2020 was passed by the Mandal Legal Services Committee in Lok Adalat Bench, Puttur. In Lok Adalat case No.2 of 2020 and thus in view of the settlement, suit was disposed of.
4. The writ petitioner filed the present writ petition on the g
Atluru Chandra Sekhara Rao v. Atluru Mahesh Babu and Ors.
Sanjay Kumar v. Secretary, City Civil Court Legal Services Authority
Point of Law : Challenge to the award of Lok Adalat can be done only by filing a writ petition under Article 226 and/or Article 227 of the Constitution of India in the High Court and that too on very....
An award from a Lok Adalat can be challenged in a writ petition if obtained through fraud or misrepresentation, as such awards are akin to compromise decrees.
A Lok Adalat award can be challenged by filing a writ petition under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India on limited grounds, and a civil suit is not maintainable to challenge a Lok Adalat aw....
Awards passed by Lok Adalat can be challenged in writ jurisdiction where fraud is alleged, despite limitations on appeals.
The absence of the complainant's consent in a Lok Adalat compromise invalidates the award, as statutory requirements for notice and participation are fundamental to upholding justice and preventing f....
Challenges to compromise decrees based on fraud must be made in the court that issued the decree, and such allegations require substantial proof.
The Lok-Adalat can settle disputes not included in pending suits, and non-registration of an award does not invalidate it.
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.