SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Telangana) 1765

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
Moushumi Bhattacharya, Gadi Praveen Kumar, JJ.
K. Kalyani – Appellant 
Versus
State Legal Services Authority – Respondent 
Writ Petition No.7968 of 2024
Decided On : 30-10-2025

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Sri Sheelam Ashok Reddy, learned counsel
For the Respondent: GP FOR LAW LEGISLATIVE AFFAIRS

Invalid Lok Adalat Award due to procedural flaws and failure to comply with registration requirements under relevant statutes.

Headnote:(A) Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987 - Principles of natural justice - The petitioners challenged an un-dated Lok Adalat Award for being illegal and contrary to the provisions of the Act - The Award was deemed invalid due to non-registration of the Release Deeds and procedural flaws in the Lok Adalat proceedings. (Paras 32, 36, 38)

(B) Registration Act, 1908 - Section 17(1)(b) - Acknowledged non-registration prevents affecting property rights - The un-registered Release Deed could not validly transfer any rights to the plaintiff. (Paras 21, 24)

(C) Limitations - The challenge to the Award was within the limitation period considering the date of knowledge. (Paras 33, 36)

Facts of the case:
The petitioners, siblings, contested an Award passed in Lok Adalat favoring their brother in a partition Suit, claiming lack of notice and involvement.

Findings of Court:
The Court found the Award procedurally flawed, lacking authenticity and violating the parties' rights.

Issues: The authenticity of the Lok Adalat Award, violation of natural justice, and the significance of duly registered documents were central issues.

Ratio Decidendi: The Court emphasized that procedural inadequacies in the Lok Adalat’s functioning are critical, especially regarding notice and authorization.

Result: The Writ Petition was allowed, and the Lok Adalat Award was set aside.

Table of Content
1. challenge on validity of lok adalat award. (Para 1 , 2 , 4)
2. arguments concerning procedural violations. (Para 5 , 6 , 7)
3. background on property and family relations. (Para 8 , 9 , 15 , 16)
4. evaluation of release deed's legality. (Para 20 , 24 , 28)
5. final ruling on award's validity. (Para 38 , 39)

ORDER :

Moushumi Bhattacharya, J.

1. The petitioners seek a declaration that an un-dated Lok Adalat Award passed in O.S.No.674 of 2020 on the file of the Mandal Legal Services Committee: Additional Junior Civil Judge, Malkajgiri, Medchal- Malkajgiri District, is illegal, violates the principles of natural justice and is contrary to the provisions of The Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987 (‘the 1987 Act’).

2. The impugned Award was passed in a Suit filed by the respondent No.4 before the I Additional Junior Civil Judge-cum-I Additional Metropolitan Magistrate at Kushaiguda, Medchal-Malkajgiri District (‘Trial Court’) for partition and separate possession. The petitioner No.1 was the defendant No.3; the petitioner No.2 was the defendant No.4 in the said Suit filed by the respondent No.4. The respondent No.5 was the defendant No.1; the respondent No.6 was the defendant No.2 in the said Suit.

3. The petitioner Nos.1, 2 and the respondent Nos.4 and 6 are sisters and brothers and children of the respondent No.5. The respondent No.4 filed the Suit before the Trial Court for partition and separate possession against the respondent Nos.5 and 6 (defendant Nos.1 and 2) and the petitioner Nos.1 and 2 (defendant Nos.3 and 4). As stated above, the defendants in the said Suit were the mother and the three other siblings of the respondent No.4/plaintiff. According to the respondent No.4, the Suit was settled between the parties culminating in the impugned Award recording, inter alia, that the plaintiff and the defendants have resolved their disputes and concludes the following:

(i) That all the defendants have mutually agreed to give-up their respective 1/5th share of land/Ac.02-19 gts. of land per defendant in the suit schedule property in favour of the plaintiff.

(ii) The Award further records that the plaintiff had agreed to pay an amount of Rs.20,30,000/- (Rupees Twenty Lakhs Thirty Thousand Only) to each of the defendant and the same has been paid to the said defendants and the same was acknowledged in the Registered Special Power of Attorneys.

(iii) That all the defendants have already signed a Release Deed in favour of the plaintiff relinquishing their respective shares in the schedule property.

The impugned Award is an un-dated Award.

4. The petitioners, i.e., the two sisters of the respondent No.4/plaintiff, have challenged the impugned Lok Adalat Award on the ground of the Suit being filed against the petitioners without service of notice to them.

5. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that the parties entered into a Registered Partition Deed on 28.12.2020 and that the respondent No.4 took care of all the documentation by obtaining the signatures of the petitioners on various documents/blank papers/blank non-judicial stamp papers etc. on the premise that the signatures are required for completing the partition and mutation of the schedule property. Counsel submits that the petitioner No.2 left India on 31.12.2020 after signing the documents on the bona fide belief that the Partition Deed was executed in respect of all the properties except the suit schedule property and that the petitioner No.1 only came to know on 29.01.2024 that the respondent Nos.4-6 had undertaken the development activities on the subject property. Counsel submits that the petitioners immediately tried to contact the respondent No.5 (their mother) as well as the respondent No.6 (their brother)/the defendant No.2 in the Suit but could not get any answers from them. The petitioners hence decided to take steps for filing a Partition Suit and accordingly the petitioner No.2 had sent a power of attorney authorizing the petitioner No.1 for t

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top