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

2026 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 28151

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Honourable Mr Justice M.DHANDAPANI
R.SUDHAKAR – Appellant
Versus
R.SANKAR – Respondent



IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 09-03-2026 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE M.DHANDAPANI WP Nos. 2886 and 19146 of 2024 and WMP Nos. 3128 & 20988 OF 2024 R.Sudhakar Petitioner(s)

Vs

1. R.Sankar

2.G.Vijayakumar

3.G.Gopal

4.The Chairman, District Legal Services Authority, District Court Buildings, Salem 636

007. (R4-impleaded as per order dated

08.03.2024 in WMP.5131/2024 In WP.2886/2024 by ASMJ) Respondent(s)

WP No. 19146 of 2024 A.Rajkumar Petitioner(s)

Vs

1. The Chairman District Legal Service Authority, District Court Buildings, Salem-636 007

2.R.Sankar

3.G.Vijayakumar

4.G.Gopal Respondent(s) PRAYER in WP No. 2886 of 2024: Petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India, calling for the records comprised in the Award made in Lok Adalat Case No. 577 of 2021 dated 24.11.2021 passed by the Lok Adalat under Section 21 of the Legal Services Authority Act, 1987 organized by the district Legal Services Authority, Salem, quash the same.

PRAYER in WP No. 19146 of 2024: Petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India, calling for records relating to the Award made in Lok Adalat Case No.577 of 2021 dated 24.11.2021 passed by the Lok Adalat under section 21 of the Legal Services Authority Act, 1987 to quash the same For Petitioner(s): Mr.L.Chandrakumar For Respondent(s): Mr.E.V.Chandru @

E.Chandrasekaran for R1 Mr. N. Kolandaivelu for R3 & R4 WP No. 2886 of 2024:

For Petitioner(s): Mr.V.Balamurugan For Respondent(s): Mr.J.Vinoth for R1 E.V.Chandru @ E.Chandrasekaran for R4 Mr. N. Kolandaivelu for R2 & R3

COMMON ORDER

Since the challenge is made to very same Lok Adalat Award, the writ petitions are clubbed together and are disposed of by way of this common order.

2. Challenging the Lok Adalat Award dated 24.11.2021 in Lok Adalat Case No.577 of 2021 by the District Legal Services Authority, the present writ petitions have been filed on the ground that Lok Adalat Award is passed as against the interest of the petitioners, who are father and son/originally one of the plaintiff.

3. The petitioner in WP.No.2886 of 2023 is the son of the petitioner in WP.No.19146 of 2024. It is the case of the petitioners that R.Sankar, the first respondent in WP.No.2886 of 2024 and R.Sudhakar (petitioner in WP.No.2886 of 2024) have filed a suit in O.S.No.210 of 2014 on the file of the learned Additional District Judge, Salem for partition and declaring of sale deeds as well as the lok adalat award dated 29.02.2012 as null and void. While the suit was pending, R.Sankar has filed an application in I.A.No.3 of 2019 seeking to transpose R.Sudhakar as a defendant on the ground that he had developed difference of opinion after the demise of his mother. The Trial Court vide order dated 25.03.2021 allowed the application and tranposed R.Sudhakar as 14th defendant in the above suit.

4. It is the grievance of the petitioners that R.Sankar along with the other private respondents conspired, colluded together and entered into a compromise amongst themselves before the Lok Adalat on 24.11.2021. The compromise is that the private respondents have paid a sum of Rs.50 lakhs to R.Sankar, who in turn, has given an undertaking that he shall not claim any right over the suit properties or challenge the sale deeds as prayed in the suit. Besides, the R.Sankar has given an undertaking that he will not press the relief of declaration to declare the lok adalat award dated 29.02.2012 as null and void. It is the contentions of the petitioner that the respondents have compromised amongst themselves without any reference to the share of the petitioners/son and father in the impugned Lok Adalat Award, hence, the Lok Adalat Award has came into existence by playing fraud by the respondents herein. Hence, seeks for quashing the same by way of these instant writ petitions.

5. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that except for D2 and D3, none of the other defendants have endorsed the settlement, therefore, the award of the Lok Adalat suffers patent illegality apa

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