The Lok Adalath cannot adjudicate on matters that are already pending before a civil court.

J U D G M E N T

The initiation of proceedings by the second respondent District Legal Services Authority on Ext.P1 petition filed by the first respondent against the petitioners and others is challenged in this original petition. There are already three suits pending between the parties as OS Nos 286/2007, 287/2007 and 114/2008 on the file of the Court of the Munsiff of Thiruvalla. The relief of declaration of title and fixation of boundary is sought therein and the first respondent has even filed a counter claim in OS No.287/2007and OS NO.114/2008.

2. The petitioners challenge the initiation of proceedings by the second respondent on the following grounds.

i) The same subject matter is already pending before the Civil Court in the three suits mentioned earlier.

ii) The proceedings shall be referred to the Lok Adalath only after notice to either parties as per the proviso to Section 20 (2) of the Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987 .

iii) Ext.P1 seeks an enquiry by the Lok Adalath which is against the scheme of the Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987 .

3. It is trite law that the Lok Adalath can only prompt a settlement between the parties and an award passed recording the compromise entered into. The Lok Adalath has no adjudicatory or judicial function. Reference in this connection to the decisions in B.P.Moideen Sevamandir and another V/s. A.M.Kutty Hassan (2009 SCC 198) and State of Punjab V/s. Jalour Singh [2008(2) KLT 236(SC)] are apposite. Ext.P12 proceedings on the other hand reflect that orders/directions have been issued in regard to matters which are pending before the Civil Court.

4. The first respondent has a contention that Ext.P12 proceedings evidence only inter-departmental communications and do not affect the petitioners. I clarify that Ext.P12 proceedings or any order passed on Ext.P1 petition will neither affect the petitioners nor affect their claim in the three civil suits pending. The revenue authorities are also very much parties to the three civil suits wherein the entire issue is at large. The petitioners are not willing for any compromise or settlement for the second respondent District Legal Services Authority to step in. I however add that proceedings, if any, pending under the Kerala Land Conservancy Act before the Tahsildar, Mallappally remain unaffected by the declaration granted in this judgment.

5. The original petition is disposed of.