Back
VISHAL DHAGAT
Dilip Mehta – Appellant
Versus
Rakesh Gupta – Respondent
Para 9 holds that a Lok Adalat award under the Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987, is final and binding only on the parties and persons claiming through them, but does not bar a third party from asserting rights to the property; thus, the Section 22E(4) bar does not apply to the petitioner as a stranger alleging fraud in the compromise decree. (!) [27000403970009][27000403970010]
Para 10 reiterates that third parties unaffected by the Lok Adalat proceedings can resist execution and assert title or interest under Order 21 Rules 97, 99, and 101 CPC before the executing court, rendering the writ unsuitable due to factual disputes and availability of statutory remedies. (!) [27000403970007][27000403970008][27000403970011]
JUDGMENT
1. Petitioner has filed this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India challenging compromise decree dated 14.5.2022 passed in RCS No.229-A/2022 by Lok Adalat, Jabalpur.
2. Virendra Patel who is respondent No.3 in this petition had entered into an agreement to sale with respondent No.1 namely Rakesh Gupta on 21.1.2009. Virendra Patel is power of attorney holder on behalf of owner Siya Bai granted to him on 29.11.2008.
3. Respondents No.1 and 2 namely Rakesh Gupta and Neeraj Jain filed civil suit No.229-A/2022 against respondent No.3 namely Virendra Patel for specific performance of contract. In said suit a joint application was filed by plaintiffs and defendant under Order 23 Rule 3 of the CPC for passing of decree on basis of compromise. On basis of said application, statements of parties were recorded. Factum of compromise was verified and application was allowed and decree was prepared accordingly. Registered sale deed was executed in favour of respondent No.1 on basis of decree dated 14.5.2022 by respondent No.3 in Office of Sub-Registrar, Jabalpur on 22.7.2022.
4. Learned counsel appearing for petitioner submitted that decree dated 14.5.2022 was obtaine
Objection to execution of decree – Statutory finality attached to Lok Adalat award leaves no room for appellate or plenary civil remedy against the award treated as a decree – Award may be executed a....
Challenges to compromise decrees based on fraud must be made in the court that issued the decree, and such allegations require substantial proof.
Point of Law : Challenge to the award of Lok Adalat can be done only by filing a writ petition under Article 226 and/or Article 227 of the Constitution of India in the High Court and that too on very....
Awards passed by Lok Adalat can be challenged in writ jurisdiction where fraud is alleged, despite limitations on appeals.
A writ petition challenging a compromise decree entered before Lok Adalat by non-impleaded necessary parties is maintainable due to allegations of fraud and procedural irregularity.
Lok Adalat compromise decrees, though final under Section 21, can be set aside in writ jurisdiction if vitiated by fraud like non-service of summons and misrepresentation to illiterate disabled party....
A compromise decree passed by a Lok Adalat cannot be challenged on grounds of misrepresentation if official records affirm that the parties were read the terms in their known language and voluntarily....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
