Lok Adalat awards must be based on a voluntary, lawful settlement reached through conciliation. Awards derived from proceedings lacking proper service of notice to all stakeholders or failing to substitute legal heirs of deceased parties are procedurally flawed and vulnerable to being set aside under the High Court's supervisory jurisdiction.

MRUGANKA SEKHAR SAHOO, J.

1. The petitioners in the writ petition challenge the order dated 10.05.2025 as well as the consequential orders dated 15.05.2025 and 19.02.2025 in C.S. No.133 of 2022 (Annexure-1) and the final decree (Annexure-7). The final decree has been passed in the partition suit.

2. The cause title of the partition suit as available on record indicates that the opposite parties no.1 and 2 were the plaintiffs before the learned Senior Civil Judge, Sambalpur. The present applicants were defendant nos.16, 17 and 21 respectively.

By order dated 09.05.2025 the learned Civil Judge, Senior Division, Sambalpur recorded the joint compromise petition filed along with sketch map stating the terms of compromise. The said order dated 09.05.2025 is reproduced herein:

“The case record is put up today. The plaintiffs and the defendants No 1 to 6, 9,10,11,13 & 23 are present in the court today along with their Aadhar Cards and they jointly filed a petition praying therein that they want to compromise this case as the issues were amicably settled between them on intervention of village gentries and relatives. The parties have filed joint compromise petition along with sketch map stating the terms of compromise. Heard the parties. Put up on 10.05.2025 for order.”

3. Thereafter the order of disposal was passed by order dated 10.05.2025. The said order is reproduced herein:

“The case record is put up today for passing necessary order before the National Lok Adalat. This order arises out of a petition filed by both the parties praying therein that they want to compromise this case as the issues were amicably settled between them on intervention of village gentries and relatives. The parties have filed joint compromise petition along with sketch map stating the terms of compromise. On enquiry, the compromise is found to be voluntary one and no undue influence or fraud has been practised. Being satisfied that the compromise is voluntary one and lawful, the said amicable settlement is accepted. As this is a suit for partition, decree in finality be drawn as per terms of compromise. The compromise petition and the sketch map do form part of the decree. Accordingly, either of the parties is directed to file the required stamp papers for engrossment of final decree.”

4. The principal ground of challenge before this Court to the order of disposal dated 10.05.2025 and the final decree passed in C.S. No.133 of 2022 before the National Lok Adalat is that the notices to the defendant nos.16, 17 and 21 was not sufficient. Concededly, they are the co-sharers of the property.

The other ground of challenge to the order is that the defendant no.9 had passed away during pendency of the civil suit and could not/was not substituted by the plaintiffs. The further ground is that the defendant no.7 had also passed away during pendency of the civil suit, remained un-substituted and there was no question of, she agreeing for any kind of compromise.

5. The learned counsel, Mr. Bose for the petitioners refers to the order dated 29.11.2024 of the learned Senior Civil Judge which reads thus:

“Advocate for plaintiff filed hazira. Adv. Sri S.K. Mishra & associates filed vakalatnama on behalf of def. No.1 to 14 and the same is accepted. Advocate for def. No.1 to 14 and 23, 24 filed separate petitions praying time for filing W.S. on the ground stated therein. Heard, the petitions are allowed. Put up on 3.1.25 for awaiting SRs of other defs and