Mandatory nature of conciliation proceedings under Section 22-C of the Legal Services Authorities Act and the consequences of bypassing this step, as emphasized by the court and the judgment in Canara Bank Vs. G.S. Jayarama (2022) 7 SCC 776.

JUDGMENT :

1. Heard Sri Ashok Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Kartikeya Saran and Sri Vinay Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the respondents.

2. The petitioner has preferred the present writ petition with the prayer to quash the ex-parte judgement and order dated 29.06.2022 passed by Permanent Lok Adalat, Agra in Complaint Case No.35 of 2020 (K.P.S Educational Trust Vs. National Insurance Company Limited and another).

3. It is argued by learned counsel for the petitioner that the order impugned has been passed by the Permanent Lok Adalat, Agra without providing any opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. It is further argued that no reasons whatsoever has been recorded in the order impugned. Hence, on both the grounds, the order passed by the Permanent Lok Adalat, Agra dated 29.06.2022 is liable to be set aside.

4. On the other hand, it is argued by Sri Kartikeya Saran, learned counsel for the respondents that if the order impugned has been passed in the absence of the petitioner, the only remedy lies with the petitioner to move a recall application before the Permanent Lok Adalat, concerned.

5. Heard learned counsel for the parties present. With the consent of learned counsel for the parties present, the present writ petition is disposed of at the admission stage itself.

6. From perusal of he order passed by the Permanent Lok Adalat, Agra, it appears that the same has been passed without providing opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. After going through the aforesaid order, the Court is of the firm opinion that no reasons whatsoever has been given while allowing the petition filed by the claimant-respondent. A complete procedural has been prescribed under Section 22(C) of the Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987 (In short "Act, 1987") to decide the dispute by the Permanent Lok Adalat and Section 22 (C) of the Act, 1987 provided that conciliation proceedings are mandatory, thereafter the Permanent Lok Adalat have adjudicatary function under Legal Services Act. Section 22 outlines the powers of the Lok Adalats and Permanent Lok Adalats. Section 22 is extracted below:

Section 22. Powers of Lok Adalats.—

(1) The Lok Adalat or Permanent Lok Adalat shall, for the purposes of holding any determination under this Act, have the same powers as are vested in a civil court under the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (5 of 1908) while trying a suit in respect of the following matters, namely:—

(a) the summoning and enforcing the attendance of any witness and examining him on oath;

(b) the discovery and production of any document;

(c) the reception of evidence on affidavits;

(d) the requisitioning of any public record or document or copy of such record or document from any court or office; and

(e) such other matters as may be prescribed.

(2) Without prejudice to the generality of the powers contained in sub-section (1), every Lok Adalat or Permanent Lok Adalat shall have the requisite powers to specify its own procedure for the determination of any dispute coming before it.

(3) All proceedings before the Lok Adalat or Permanent Lok Adalat shall be deemed to be judicial proceedings within the meaning of Sections, 193, 219 and 228 of the Indian Penal Code (45 of 1860) and every Lok Adalat shall be deemed to be a civil court for the purpose of Section 195 and Chapter XXVI of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974)."

7. Section 22-C of the Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987 stipulates the instances in which Permanent Lok Adalats can take cognizance of cases. Section 22-C provides as follows:

"22-C. Cognizance of cases by Permanent Lok Adalat.— (1) Any party to a dispute may, before the dispute is brought before any court, make an application to the Permanent Lok Adalat for the settlement of dispute:

Provided that the Permanent Lok Adalat shall not have jurisdiction in respect of any matter relating to an offence not compoundable under any law:

Provided further that the Permanent Lok Adalat shall also