A Lok Adalat award can be challenged if a party was absent during mediation, indicating that all parties must be duly represented for the award to be valid.

JUDGMENT :

SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI, J.

1. Heard Mr. Ram Kinkar, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, Mr. Manoj Kumar Choubey, learned counsel appearing for the O.P. Nos. 1 to 9 and Mr. Aman Mukherjee, learned counsel appearing for the O.P. Nos. 10 to 31.

2. This petition has been filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, wherein prayer has been made for setting aside the award dated 12.11.2022, passed by the Lok Adalat, Garhwa, in O.S. No. 143 of 2019.

3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner herein namely Jibsa Devi along with her sister-the present O.P. No. 1 Kamla Devi @ Lamla Devi brought the Partition Suit No. 11 of 2019 in the court of learned Civil Judge, Senior Division-I, Garhwa, which was subsequently transferred after change of pecuniary jurisdiction to the court of the learned Munsif, Garhwa and the same being re-numbered as O.S. No. 143 of 2019 against the defendants seeking reliefs therein that a Preliminary decree of 1/8^th share in the land of Schedule- A of the plaint and 1/16^th share in the land and house of schedule- B of the plaint, be passed for each of the plaintiffs and thereafter by appointing of Batwara Commissioner takhta of each of the plaintiffs in the suit land be carved out and after confirmation of final decree of takhtas of both the plaintiffs be prepared and the plaintiffs be put in possession of their so carved out takhta through the process of the court.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that after issuance of the summons, the defendants appeared in the suit and filed their written statement on 24.06.2019. He further submits that the said suit was sent for mediation before the Mediation Centre, Garhwa and consequently, it was registered as M.C. Case No. 467 of 2022. He submits that the petitioner herein is the plaintiff No. 1 in the said suit has not appeared in the Mediation and collusively the settlement has been made between the other plaintiffs as well as the defendants in absence of the present petitioner and on the basis of the said, the matter was sent to the Lok Adalat and the Lok Adalat passed the award dated 12.11.2022 in O.S. No. 143 of 2019 and the suit was disposed of in terms of the order dated 12.11.2022. He further submits that the intervenors have also filed petition in the said Misc. Case No. 02 of 2023 arising out of O.S. No. 143 of 2019 stating that they have not been made party in the said suit on the ground that the suit land is also their ancestral land being the descendent of common ancestor Lochi Mahto and the suit has been compromised behind their back and the intervenors’ petition was allowed by the order dated 08.08.2023. He submits that the said intervention petition was filed in the Miscellaneous Case No. 02 of 2023, which was meant for recalling the order dated 12.11.2022, whereby, on the basis of the award, the suit has been disposed of. He then submits that in view of that in absence of intervenors also, the award has been passed and the learned court has dismissed the miscellaneous petition No. 02 of 2023 on the ground of jurisdiction by the order dated 28.08.2024.

5. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner further submits that erroneously Misc. Case No. 02 of 2024 has been filed before the learned court, however, the remedy was only to move before this court under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India. On these grounds, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the impugned award may kindly be set aside and the original suit may kindly be restored to its original file.

6. Learned counsel appearing for the oppo