IMPORTANT POINT
The main legal point established in the judgment is the finality and binding nature of Lok Adalat awards, and the limited grounds on which they can be challenged under Article 226 and/or Article 227 of the Constitution of India.

ORDER:

This Civil Revision Petition is filed assailing the orders dated 09.10.2015 in I.A.No.238 of 2007 in O.S.No.697 of 2006 on the file of the Principal Junior Civil Judge, Warangal.

2. Application in I.A.No.238 of 2007 was filed under Order 22, Rule 3(A) of Civil Procedure Code (for short ‘CPC’) to set aside the compromise decree passed by Lok Adalat on 26.04.2006 in O.S.No.697 of 2006 on the file of the Principal Junior Civil Judge, Warangal. Learned Principal Junior Civil Judge, Warangal has allowed the said application by setting aside the Lok Adalat Award dated 26.04.2006 in O.S.No.697 of 2006 on the file of the Principal Junior Civil Judge, Warangal. Feeling aggrieved by the same, the defendant has filed this CRP.

3. Heard the learned counsel on both sides. The submissions made by the learned counsel on either sides have received due consideration of this Court. Perused the record.

4. For the sake of convenience the parties are hereinafter referred to as plaintiff and defendant as they were arrayed in OS No.697 of 2006 before the trial Court.

5. The plaintiff has filed O.S.No.697 of 2006 on the file of the Principal Junior Civil Judge, Warangal for the relief of perpetual injunction in respect of the suit schedule property and during pendency of the suit, the matter was referred to the Lok Adalat and it was settled in terms of compromise and an award was passed before the Lok Adalat on 26.04.2006. After passing the award before the Lok Adalat, the plaintiff has filed an application in I.A.No.238 of 2007 in O.S.No.697 of 2006 to set aside the award dated 26.04.2006 passed before the Lok Adalat.

6. Be it stated that the trial Court, after recording the evidence of PWs.1 to 5 and marking Exs.P1 to P5 on behalf of the plaintiff, has passed the impugned order. The relevant portion of the said order is extracted as below :

“From sum of the above fact and discussion, it is clear that award passed by the Lok Adalat is beyond the scope of alleged terms of compromise arrived between the petitioner and the respondent and basing on that award Thota Sateesh cannot obtain the sale deed. The evidence of PWs.4 and 5 coupled with the evidence of PWs.1 and 2 clearly show that for the purpose of obtaining the decree of compromise, the respondent kept the life of husband of under threat and compelled the petitioner to sign on terms of compromise. So, the terms of compromise itself is vitiated by coercion. Consequently, the award passed by the Lok Adalat basing on these terms of compromise is illegal. Moreover as discussed supra, the award is exceeding the terms of compromise and the award is passed as if it is for specific performance of contract in favour of the third party to the present suit. In those circumstances, the petitioner is justified in challenging the award passed by the Lok Adalat. By the time of filing the petition there is no clear decision whether a suit can be filed challenging the award passed by the Lok Adalat and petition is filed as per the decision No.1 relied on by the counsel for the petitioner. Decision No.3 is recently cited and by that time already enquiry was completed and evidence was adduced by the petitioner. At this stage basing on technicalities, dismissing the petition directing the petitioner to file a suit is not proper. Hence, it is a fit case to set aside the award passed by the Lok Adalat on 26.04.2006.

7. Feeling aggrieved by the impugned order passed by the trial Court setting aside the Lok Adalat Award dated 26.04.2006, the defendant has filed this CRP alleging that the Principal Junior Civil Judge has usurped the jurisdiction which did not vest in him and the order under revision is beyond the jurisdiction of Principal Junior Civil Judge at Warangal. The learned Principal Junior Civil Judge is not competent to revoke the terms recorded before the Lok Adalat and he has acted against the judgments and settled principles laid by the Hon’ble Supreme Court and by this Court as the decree passed by Lok Ada