Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD
Ravindra V. Ghuge, J.
Kusumbai - Appellant
Vs.
Bhausaheb - Respondent
Writ Petition No. 10639 of 2018
Decided On : 28-03-2019
Lok Adalat - Challenge by Third Party - Specific Relief Act, 1963, Section 34, Andhra Pradesh High Court judgment in Batchu Subba Lakshmi case - The court discussed the issue of whether a third party can challenge the award of the Lok Adalat before the High Court and concluded that a third party can challenge the Lok Adalat award if the ground of fraud and misrepresentation is prima facie made out. The judgment also highlighted the grounds for challenge and the legal provisions under Section 20(3) and (5) of the Act.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioners sought to challenge the award of the Lok Adalat on the ground that they were excluded from the litigation and alleged fraud by the plaintiff and defendants in settling the suit within a short period of its institution.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the exclusion of the petitioners and the settlement of the suit within a short period raised prima facie evidence of fraud. It concluded that the third party, in this case, the petitioners, could challenge the Lok Adalat award if the ground of fraud and misrepresentation was prima facie made out.
Issues: The main issue was whether a third party could challenge the award of the Lok Adalat before the High Court on the ground of fraud and misrepresentation.
Ratio Decidendi: The court relied on the Andhra Pradesh High Court judgment in Batchu Subba Lakshmi case and the legal provisions under Section 20(3) and (5) of the Act to establish that a third party can challenge the Lok Adalat award if the ground of fraud and misrepresentation is prima facie made out.
Final Decision: The Writ Petition was allowed, the Lok Adalat award was quashed and set aside, and the suit was restored to the file of the Trial Court. The petitioners were granted permission to move an application for being impleaded as defendants in the suit, and all litigating sides were refrained from creating third party interest or encumbrances on the suit properties.
Ravindra V. Ghuge, J.
Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith and heard finally by the consent of the parties.
2. The issue raised in this petitioner is as to whether, the third party can challenge the award of the Lok Adalat before the High Court on the ground that the litigating sides had excluded the third party from the litigation?
3. The Petitioners, Kusumbai wife of Ramesh Palve and her daughters, namely, Swati and Mangal, are aggrieved by the award of the Lok Adalat dated 08.07.2017 by which, Regular Civil Suit No.730/2017 was compromised and two properties involved in the said suit were shared by the litigating sides to the said suit.
4. Considering the extensive submissions of the learned advocates for the respective sides, I find it apposite to record the details of relevant events, hereunder :-
(a) Barku was the original owner of the properties.
(b) Kondabai is the wife of Barku.
(c) Bhausaheb and Ramesh are the two sons of Barku and Kondabai. Lahanabai is the daughter of the said couple.
(d) Ramesh has passed away in an accident on 08.04.2000 and Kusumbai is the surviving widow along with the two daughters, Swati and Mangal.
(e) Regular Civil Suit No.447/2000 was preferred by the Petitioners (Kusumbai, Swati and Mangal) seeking partition and separate possession of the ancestral joint family properties. The present Respondents (Bhausaheb, Kondabai and Lahanabai) were arrayed as the Defendants in the said suit.
(f) RCS No.447/2000 was compromised in the Lok Adalat on 02.09.2002. Survey No.104 AA in Vadjai area admeasuring 1 H 55 R=3 Acres 35 Gunthas was handed over to Kondabai and Lahanabai.
(g) There were several other properties, which were partitioned by the compromise award, but are not being referred to in this order as they are not connected with the subsequent suit.
(h) RCS No.730/2017 was filed by Bhausaheb arraying Kondabai and Lahanabai as the Defendants on 30.06.2017. The Petitioners were excluded.
(i) The Defendants (Kondabai and Lahanabai) appeared suo moto in the Trial Court and the suit was listed in the Lok Adalat to be held on 08.07.2017, which is within 08 days of the lodging of the suit.
(j) On 08.07.2017, the compromise took place between the Plaintiff (Bhausaheb) and the Defendants (Kondabai and Lahanabai) with reference to the land Gat No.126/A/1 admeasuring 0.10 Gunthas and Gat No.104/AA/1 in Vadjai area admeasuring 7 Acres 19 Gunthas.
(k) The Plaintiff (Bhausaheb) has pleaded in the plaint in paragraphs 3, 4 and 8 that two suit properties in the second suit are ancestral properties belonging to the joint Hindu family.
(l) In the order of the Lok Adalat Panel dated 08.07.2017, it was noted that these three litigants are the only legal representatives.
(m) In the compromise terms dated 08.07.2017, signed by all the three litigants, it was mentioned that besides these three persons there is no other legal representative.
(n) The suit property in the second suit was Survey No.104/AA/1 in Vadjai area admeasuring 7 Acres 19 Gunthas and the suit property in the first suit was Survey No.104/AA in Vadjai area admeasuring 3 Acres 35 Gunthas.
5. The learned counsel for the Respondents places reliance upon the judgment of the Honourable Supreme Court in the matter of Bhargavi Constructions and another vs. Kothakapu Muthyam Reddy and others, (2017) AIR SC 4428 : (2018) 13 SCC 480, and contends that in such peculiar circumstances, the Petitioners must resort to a new suit and seek a declaration that the Lok Adalat award would not be binding upon them.
6. I find from Bhargavi Constructions (supra) that the Honourable Supreme Court was not dealing with the issue as to whether, a third party could also have the same remedy of challenging the Lok Adalat award in the High Court contending that such third party is aggrieved by the Lok Adalat Award. The Honourable Supreme Court, therefore, concluded that an "aggrieved party" can challenge the Lok Adalat award before the High Court.
7. The Division Bench of the Andhra Pradesh Hi
AI
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
