CHAKRADHARI SHARAN SINGH
Dhirendra Pratap Singh – Appellant
Versus
Ravi Kant Singh – Respondent
From the pleadings in the present application under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, it appears that some misconception prevails with respect to the existence, jurisdiction and functioning of “Permanent Lok Adalats” which are certainly creation of Chapter VIA of the Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987 (hereinafter referred to as the “Act”), introduced by way of amendment vide Amendment Act No. 37 of 2002 in the Act.
2. The order dated 10.06.2011 said to have been passed by “Permanent Lok Adalat” Kaimur at Bhabhua in Miscellaneous Case No. 06 of 2004, whereby it has set aside the award dated 20.12.2003 passed by Lok Adalat Camp Kaimur at [Bhabhua] is under challenge in the present application under Article 227 of the Constitution of India.
3. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Respondents No. 1 and 2. Facts are not much in dispute and are based on record. A Title Suit No. 283 of 2003 was filed by the petitioner in the Court of Sub-Judge-1st, Bhabhua for declaration of his title over schedule „Ka? of the land as described in the plaint. During the pendency of the suit, the parties agreed to settle their d
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.