The Permanent Lok Adalat constituted under the Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987 has no jurisdiction to entertain and adjudicate the motor accident compensation claim under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988.

As per Hon'ble Shri N.K. Agarwal, J. :-

1. This order shall govern disposal of above two writ petitions.

2. Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Company Limited who is petitioner in both the writ petitions is challenging jurisdiction of Permanent Lok Adalat to entertain and adjudicate claim petitions under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (briefly 'the Act of 1988').

3. For proper appreciation of legal issues involved in the case, the facts in W.P. (227) No. 292/2009 is set down hereunder :-

Respondent No. 1 instituted a claim petition before the Permanent Lok Adalat, Bilaspur under Section 22-A of the Legal Services Authority Act, 1987 (briefly 'the Act of 1987') claiming amount of Rs. 5,50,000/- as compensation for the injuries sustained by him in the motor accident dated 1-3-2008 against the driver, owner and petitioner i.e. insurer of the truck bearing registration No.CG07 C/7247. After receipt of notice; the petitioner/insurance company raised a preliminary objection challenging jurisdiction of Permanent Lok Adalat to entertain and adjudicate the claim under the Act of 1988. Vide impugned order, the Permanent Lok Adalat dismissed the objection raised by the petitioner. Hence this petition.

4. Shri Rajput learned counsel for the petitioner would submit, power is not vested with respondent No. 4 to entertain and adjudicate and award compensation in respect of injuries sustained in an accident. Accident is a tortuous act and in order to obtain compensation, case has to be filed before Motor Accident Claims Tribunal specially constituted for the purpose under Section 165 of the Act of 1988. He would further submit, learned Permanent Lok Adalat has no jurisdiction to pass any order or award where parties do not agree for compromise or settlement of their dispute. It was further contended there is no privity of contract between respondent No. 1 and the petitioner. Hence it cannot take benefit of Section 22-A of the Act of 1987. Respondent No. 1 is a third party to the contract of insurance between the petitioner and the respondent No.3. Hence provision of Section 22 of the Act of 1987 would not apply.

5. On the other hand, Shri S.K. Tiwari, learned counsel appearing for the respondent No. 3 would support the order impugned.

6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the order impugned.

7. The core question arises for decision making is whether the Permanent Lok Adalat constituted under Section 22-B of the Act of 1987 has jurisdiction to entertain and adjudicate a motor accident compensation claim under the Act of 1988.

8. Under Chapter VI of Act of 1987, Lok Adalats have been conferred jurisdiction to resolve any matter which is already pending in the court or which may be brought before the court except the cases or matters relating to an offence not compoundable under any law by means of amicable settlement.

9. Chapter VI-A of the Act was substituted by amendment of the Legal Services Authorities Act brought about in the year 2002. Section 22A(a) defines Permanent Lok Adalat as one established under sub-section (1) of Section 22B. Section 22A(b) defines the Public Utility Services as follows :-

(i) transport service for the carriage of passengers or goods by air, road or water; or

(ii) postal, telegraph or telephone service; or

(iii) supply of power, light or water to the public by any establishment;

or

(iv) system of public conservancy or sanitation; or

(v) service in hospital or dispensary; or

(vi) insurance service.

10. Section 22-B provides for the establishment of a Permanent Lok Adalat. Section 22B(1) reads as follows:-

"22B(1) Notwithstanding anything contained in Section 19, the Central Authority or as the case may be, every State Authority shall, by notification, establish Permanent Lok Adalats at such places and for exercising such jurisdiction in respect of one or more public utility services and for such areas as may be specified in the notification".

11. Section 22C provides for cognizance of cases by Permanent