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) 35974

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
M.Dhandapani, J
D.Vasanthakumar – Appellant
Versus
The District Legal Service Authority, Tiruvallur. – Respondent
WP No. 13140 of 2026 & WMP.No.14399 of 2026 | O.S.No.123 of 2021 | EP.No.12 of 2025



Advocates:
For Petitioner: Ms.D.Jeevitha
For Respondent:Mr.T.M.Rajangam for R1, Government Advocate

Lok Adalat awards under Section 22-E are final and binding; challenges barred by laches after unexplained delay.

Headnote:The Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987, particularly Sections 20, 21, and 22-E, empowers Lok Adalat to pass awards with the status of court decrees, which are final and binding, not challengeable in suits or execution proceedings. Petitioner challenged a Lok Adalat award directing demolition of a compound wall in a suit over alleged encroachment on a common pathway, claiming lack of free consent due to misleading advice from counsel. Court found petitioner signed compromise and award knowingly, with unexplained delay in challenging. Issue framed: Whether Lok Adalat award based on signed compromise can be quashed for alleged non-voluntary consent after significant delay. Ratio: Awards under Section 22-E are final; petitioner admitted signing terms and award in 2022, became aware via execution notice in 2025, yet filed writ in 2026, barred by laches. Writ petition dismissed; no merits found, miscellaneous petition closed.

Table of Content
1. challenge to non-consensual lok adalat award over property encroachment. (Para 2 , 3)
2. lok adalat awards final under sections 20, 21, 22-e. (Para 5 , 6)
3. petition barred by laches despite admitted signatures. (Para 7 , 8)
4. writ petition dismissed for lack of merits. (Para 9)

ORDER

By consent of both parties, this writ petition is taken up for final disposal at the admission stage itself. Since no order is passed against the private respondent, notice to the private respondent is dispensed with.

2. This writ petition has been filed challenging the Lok Adalat Award dated 11.08.2022 passed in O.S.No.123 of 2021 on the file of the District Munsif Court, Thiruvallur, and quash the same as illegal, arbitrary and not based on free and voluntary consent of the petitioner and consequently direct the 2nd respondent not to interfere with the petitioners peaceful possession and enjoyment of his property situated in Survey No.521/2 at Ikkadu Village, Thiruvallur Taluk and District.

3. It is the case of the petitioner that the second respondent raised dispute alleging that the petitioner has encroached upon the common pathway by putting up a compound wall, thereafter, the petitioner filed a suit in O.S.No.123 of 2021 on the file of District Munsif Court, Tiruvallur seeking permanent injunction against the second respondent. The Trial Court referred the matter to Lak Adalat to amicable settlement. The petitioner acting on the advise of his counsel and under the bonafide belief that the dispute would be amicably resolved in his favour, signed certain compromise papers without fully understanding the contents or implications. The Lok Adalat passed an award on 11.08.2021 recording the compromise and directing demolition of the petitioner's compound wall which according to the petitioner is not voluntarily agreed. The second respondent filed EP.No.12 of 2025 seeking enforcement.

Challenging the Lok Adalat award, the present writ petition has been filed. 4. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate and perused the materials placed on record.

5. At the outset, it is apposite to take into consideration of the relevant provisions of the Legal Services Authority Act, 1987. Section 20 of the Act empowers Lok Adalat to pass an award. Section 21 of the Act gives the award of a Lok Adalat, the status of a Court Decree. Section 22-E provides that every award passed in Lok Adalat under this Act made either on merit or in terms of a settlement agreement shall be final and binding on all the parties thereto and on persons claiming under them and such an award shall be deemed to be a decree of the Civil Court and sub-section 4 of Section 22-E also prescribes that every award made by the Lok Adalat under this Act shall be made final and shall not be called in question in any original suit application or execution proceedings.

6. Section 22-E of the Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987 reads as follows:-

22E. Award of Permanent Lok Adalat to be final.—(1)

Every award of the Permanent Lok Adalat under this Act made either on merit or in terms of a settlement agreement shall be final and binding on all the parties thereto and on persons claiming under them.

(2) Every award of the Permanent Lok Adalat under this Act shall be deemed to be a decree of a civil court.

(3) The award made by the Permanent Lok Adalat under this Act shall be by a majority of the persons constituting the Permanent Lok Adalat.

(4) Every award made by the Permanent Lok Adalat under this Act shall be final and shall not be called in question in any original suit, application or execution proceeding.

(5) The Permanent Lok Adalat may transmit any award made by it to a civil court having local jurisdiction and such civil court shall execute the order as if it were a decree made by that court.]

7. The bone of contention of the petitioner is that he was misled into signing the document. Admittedly, the petitioner does not dispute that he had sig

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