The main legal point established in the judgment is the binding nature and finality of awards of Lok Adalat under section 21 of the Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987, and the non-appealable and non-reviewable nature of such awards.

JUDGMENT :-

Prakash Shrivastava, J.

1. This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner, Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd., challenging the award dated 1.8.2008 passed by the Lok Adalat and the order dated 10.12.2008 passed by the Tribunal rejecting the petitioner's application for setting aside the award.

2. Brief facts are that the respondents, who are the widow and minor children of deceased Jagdish Kachnar, had filed the claim petition before the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Indore stating that the deceased Jagdish met with an accident on 23.10.2007 involving motor cycle bearing No. MP 09-LL 5583. The petitioner was arrayed as respondent No. 3 in the claim petition as insurer of the vehicle. The matter was placed before the Lok Adalat held on 1.8.2008 and on the basis of the compromise arrived at between the parties, Lok Adalat passed the award dated 1.8.2008 amounting to Rs. 4,00,000. The petitioner, insurance company thereafter filed an application before the Tribunal praying for setting aside the award on the ground that later on insurance company found one investigation report in its file on the basis of which the insurance company could not be held liable. The Tribunal by the impugned order dated 10.12.2008 rejected the application. Aggrieved with the award passed by the Lok Adalat and the order of the Tribunal dated 10.12.2008, the petitioner has filed the present writ petition.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that due to inadvertence the investigation report could not be placed on record before the Tribunal and the officers of the insurance company had committed a mistake in accepting the compromise, therefore, the award of the Lok Adalat is liable to be set aside and that the Tribunal committed an error in rejecting the petitioner's application for setting aside the award.

4. We have heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner at length.

5. The award dated 1.8.2008 was passed by the Lok Adalat in terms of the provisions of the Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987. Under section 21 of the Act such an award is final and binding and it is like a decree of the court. Section 21 of the Act provides that:

"21. Award of Lok Adalat. (1) Every award of the Lok Adalat shall be deemed to be a decree of a civil court or, as the case may be, an order of any other court and where a compromise or settlement has been arrived at, by a Lok Adalat in a case referred to it under sub-section (1) of section 20, the court-fee paid in such case shall be refunded in the manner provided under the Court Fees Act, 1870.

(2) Every award made by a Lok Adalat shall be final and binding on all the parties to the dispute, and no appeal shall lie to any court against the award."

6. In the present case since the award was passed with consent and consent is not disputed, therefore, question of setting aside the award on the basis of some material subsequently discovered by the insurance company does not arise. Since by a deeming fiction created under section 21 of the Act, such an award is decree of the civil court, therefore, in normal course ordinarily it is not open to challenge in a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The Supreme Court in the matter of P.T. Thomas v. Thomas Job, (2005) 6 SCC 478, while considering the binding nature of award of Lok Adalat held:

"(21) The Lok Adalat will pass the award with the consent of the parties, therefore, there is no need either to reconsider or review the matter again and again, as the award passed by the Lok Adalat shall be final. Even as under section 96 (3) of Civil Procedure Code 'no appeal shall lie from a decree passed by the court with the consent of parties'. The award of the Lok Adalat is an order by the Lok Adalat with the consent of the parties, and it shall be deemed to be a decree of the civil court, therefore, an appeal shall not lie from the award of the Lok Adalat as under section 96 (3), Civil Procedure Code.

(23) The High Court of Andh