14 - Chapter 9 PDF

Download as pdf or txt
Download as pdf or txt
You are on page 1of 59

CHAPTER - IX

LOK ADALAT SYSTEM IN INDIA


CHAPTER-IX

LOK ADALAT SYSTEM IN INDIA

9.1 Introduction

Peace is the sine qua non for development. Disputes and conflicts consume

valuable time, effort, money, etc., of the society. It is of utmost significance that there

should not be any conflict in the society. But, in a realist sense, this is not possible. So, the

next prime solution is that any conflict, which raises its head, is nipped in the bud. With

the judicial system in majority of the countries being burdened with cases, any current

case takes a long time to be decided. And, till the time the final decision comes, there is a

state of uncertainty, havoc, etc., which makes any activity almost impossible. Commerce,

business, development work, administration, etc., all suffer since long time is taken in

resolving disputes through litigation.1

To get out this labyrinth of litigation, courts and lawyers’ chambers: majority of the

countries prefer alternatives or supplementary methods of dispute resolution. India has a

long tradition and history of such methods being practiced in the society at grass roots

level. These are called Panchayat and in the legal terminology, these are called arbitration.

These are widely used in India for resolution of disputes- both commercial and non­

commercial. Other alternative methods being used are Lok Adalat technicalities. Methods

like negotiation, mediation and conciliation are being increasingly used to resolve disputes

instead of going for litigation. There have been recent amendments in the procedural law

of India to incorporate these methods so that people get justice in a speedy manner,

without incurring little expenses in order avoid conflict in the society.2

1 Anurag K Agarawal, “Rule of Alternative Dispute Resolution Method in development Society, Lok Adalat’ in
India”, Ahmedabad: Indian Institute of Management
2 Ibid
238
9.2 Lok Adalat and Speedier Justice

Particularly, the method of supplementary dispute resolution mechanism i.e., Lok

Adalat, in making inexpensive, efficacious and speedy justice accessible to the public. The

Constitution of India guarantees ‘Right to Constitutional Remedies’ as a fundamental

right. The government provides free legal aid to the needy. However, in a country of

continental dimensions and with population more than a billion, it becomes very difficult

to provide free legal aid to everyone. People care about their rights much more when they

are aware and are ‘legal literate’. Efforts are also being done at provincial level.3

In majority of the developing countries in the world justice delivery institutions are

currently confronted with serious crises, chiefly due to delay in the resolution of the disputes,

particularly the delay in disposal of the commercial and other civil matters. It must be

admitted that this situation is breaking up public trust and public confidence in the justice

delivery institutions. It hinders economic growth, development and social justice to the

citizens in a country. The crises therefore, call for an urgent solution. The cause for such

backlog of cases is institutional and the delay in disposal of the cases is on account of

procedural laws. Administrative institutions have failed to monitor the status, substance and

pace of litigation in the courts. The beginning of the modem ADR movement is from United

States of America. Chief Justice Warren Burger on noticing the increase of cases from 2000 to

about 5000 in the US Supreme Court “between” 1963 to 1982 made the following remarks:

“We are moving towards a time when it will be impossible for the courts

to cope up with the dockets. If something is not done, the result will be a

production of line ofjustice that none of us would want to see. ”4

3 Ibid
4http://www.icdr.org/article 6. html.
239
It is sure that none of the countries and states is free from litigation, but cases

should be disposed of as early as possible. It is the duty of the concerned State

governments to settle disputes through alternative methods or supplementary method. A

state government’s duty is to safeguard the genuine rights of the people and not to usurp

them, he stated. In India, since legal aid is inaccessible to so many people, Lok Adalats

and Legal Aid Boards are meant for providing justice to the common people. The poor

find it laborious to prosecute or defend a case on account of high costs involved.

Distinguished judges of the Supreme Court and High Courts have many a time point out

the need for free legal aid to the poor. The Central Government, taking note of the need

for legal aid for the poor and the needy, had introduced Article 39 (A) in the Constitution

in February 1977. Thus in the Directive Principles of the State Policy, it is now enshrined

that the Central and State Governments should ensure that the operation of the legal

system promote justice on the basis of equal opportunity and shall in particular provide

free legal aid for the poor and ensure that justice is not denied to them for economic

reasons or other disabilities.5

Alternative Dispute Resolution mechanism is appropriate to alternative mechanism

to resolve disputes in place of litigation. The Committee for implementing Legal Aid

Schemes (CILAS) organized by the Ministry of Law and Justice, Govt, of India in 1980

recommended the establishment of Lok Adalat. As a result, Lok Adalat movement is

endorsed to be one of the integrals. It has assumed great importance and attained statutory

re-congestions under the Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987, which was enforced w.e.f.

November 9, 1995. They are not similar to regularly constituted courts but they

5 DR. K.S. Chauhan Alternative Dispute Resolution In India, ICADR

240
supplement the existing justice administration system. They provide satisfactory and

proficient means of disputes resolution at a reasonable cost. Special status has been

assigned to the Lok Adalat under the Legal Services Authorities Act which provides

statutory base to such Lok Adalat, which is regularly organized primarily by the State

Legal Aid and Advice Boards with the help of District Legal Aid and Advice Committees.

Some of the Lok Adalats are being sponsored by the various voluntary legal aid agencies.

The whole emphasis in the Lok Adalat proceedings is on conciliation rather than

adjudication.6 Thus in recent times Lok Adalats had grown well as an alternative dispute

resolution mechanism and the system became very popular too. This is more based on

morality and honesty, the real pillars of our traditional society.7 8

The prominent characteristics of this form of dispute resolution are participation,

accommodation, fairness, expectation, voluntariness, neighborliness, transparency,

efficiency and lack of animosity. The concept of Lok Adalats was pushed back into non­

existence in last few centuries before independence and particularly during the British

regime. Now, this concept has, once again, been restored. It has, once again, become very

popular and familiar amongst litigants. This is the system which has deep roots in Indian

legal history and its close fidelity to the culture and perception of justice in Indian ethos.

Experience has displayed that it is one of the very productive and significant ADRs and
O

most fitted to the Indian environment, culture and societal interests.

Lok Adalat is not a ‘court’ as understood by lawyers, though the common people

may find attributes of a court in it and may even call it by that name, it is just a forum

6 Ibid
7 Speech delivered at Foundation Stone laying ceremony of Nyaya Seva Sadan Building at District Court complex at
Chittoor on 16-09-2001, Lok Adalat and legal aid -a brief analysis by justice P S Narayana
8 http://www.legalserviceindia.com/articles/cpc_evd.htm.

241
provided by the people themselves or by interested parties including social activists, legal

aiders and public-spirited people belonging to every walk of life. The forum is contrived

for enabling the common people to ventilate their grievances against the State agencies or

against other citizens and to seek a just settlement if possible. In order to ensure that the

settlement is fair and according to law, the forum may consist of legally trained people

who are respected in the community where the Lok Adalat is constituted. Their function is

only to enable the parties who voluntarily seek the Adalat’s intervention to understand

their respective rights and obligations with reference to the dispute brought before it and to

help keep the dialogue going in a fair manner. Their role is neither to judge the issues

thrown up in the discussion nor to give a verdict at the end of it. They are not conciliators

or arbitrators in the traditional sense who have powers conferred under different statutes or

under mutual agreement between parties. Apart from being ‘good Samaritans’ their role is

to clarify the law and by gentle persuasion to convince the parties how they stand to gain

by an agreed settlement.9

Lok Adalat is not a part of the legal aid bureaucracy. In fact, all laws and the

Constitution demand mutual settlement of disputes which, under any circumstances, is

superior to long drawn-out, expensive litigation. There are comparable provisions in the

Civil Procedure Code, Criminal Procedure Code and in a variety of special and local laws

(family Courts Act) which enable the court to attempt settlements and avoid adjudication

whenever possible. The rationale behind such provisions is sound experience which tells

us that an adversary adjudication ending up in one party declared the victor and the other

the vanquished does not remove the dispute from society and may lead to further disputes

or social tensions. On the other hand, mutually agreed settlements contribute to greater

9 N R Madhavan Menon, Lok Adalat: People Programee for Speedy Justice, Indian Bar Review, Vol. 13 (2): 1986

242
social solidarity and better cohesion among disputants. Perhaps culturally and historically,

Indian people are disposed to conciliated settlements with community intervention rather

than adjudicated decisions through adversarial process of formal courts.10 Lok Adalat is

also not a new name for the traditional Nyaya Panchayats though both share many

common characteristics.11

The word “Lok” has been profusely used in political contents and made use of by

political parties as a part of their appellations. It is heartening to note that Indian

jurisprudential thought has, in recent times, accorded a respectable place to this word by

christening the forum for judicial determination envisaged and elaborated under the Legal

Services Authorities Act, 1987, as “Lok Adalat”. In Lok Adalat, the “Lok” content i.e. the

public opinion aspect and the “Adalat” content i.e. the accurate and thorough deliberation

aspect have to be judiciously blended and balanced, especially in view of the fact that the

decisions of Lok Adalat have been made non-appealable.12

The Lok Adalat is not a people’s court in the sense in which it is understood in

some other legal system like in Soviet, although literally translated a Lok Adalat means a

people’s court. It may be better to call it a court for the people, but almost every court of

whatever description is meant for the people. The Lok Adalat is not a Nyaya Panchayat or

village Nyaya Panchayat of Indian tradition. Nor is it a village Panchayat recognized

under the Village Panchayat Acts in some States. It is not caste Panchayat like ‘Kula

Peddalu’ or ‘jati sabha’. It is neither a Bench Court nor a statutory tribunal meant to

adjudicate or arbitrate. Generally speaking Lok Adalat is a para-judicial institution being

developed by the people themselves, still in its infancy, trying to find an appropriate

10 Ibid
"Ibid
12 By M.Sreedevi, Implementation of Legal Services in T.Narsipura and Mysore Taluks.

243
structure and procedure in the struggle of the common people for social justice. It is bom

out of a belief that even if State-supported programmes of legal aid were able to provide

legal assistance to every indigent client (which, of course, is wishful thinking) that is not

going to solve the problems of the poor vis-vis the administration of justice. The poor do

not have the staying power which litigation inevitably involves: nor can they expect equal

justice in all stages of the complicated and technical procedures of the law. Even the not-

so-poor find it pmdent to invoke informal processes if available to settle their disputes. In

other words Lok Adalat phenomenon is an expression of the disgust and disenchantment

of the poor and the middle class people in respect of the court system as it functions today.

9.3 History of ADR and Lok Adalat India:

Alternative Dispute Resolution has been an integral part of Indian historical past. Like the

zero, the concept of Lok Adalat (Peoples' Court) is an innovative Indian contribution to the

world jurisprudence.13 Lok-Adalat, as one of the alternative dispute resolution mechanisms,

plays a significant role in modem days. The institution is developing day by day for the last

two decades. The institution of Lok Adalat in India, as the very name suggests, means,

People's Court.14 India has a long tradition and history of such methods beings practiced in the

society at grass roots level. These are called Panchayat and in the legal terminology, these are

called arbitration. They are widely used in India for resolution of disputes both commercial

and non-commercial. Other supplementary method being used are Lok Adalat (People’s

Court), where justice is dispensed summarily without too much emphasis on legal

technicalities.15

13 ibid
H http://keIsa.nic.in/lokadalat.htm
15 Institute of Management Ahmedabad, Rule of Alternative Dispute Resolution Method in Development Society,
‘Lok Adalat’ in India, Anurag K Agarawal, W.P.No. 2005-11-01. P. 5
244
Lok Adalat is a judicial institution developed by the people themselves for social

justice and it settles litigation by negotiation, arbitration or conciliation. It is a dispute

settlement agency. Lok Adalats are not alternative to the existing courts. They are only

supplementary to the courts. It is a judicial institution developed by the people themselves

for social justice. In this respect, traditional system of justice is not enough for the larger

societal interest and for the people committed to peace and inquisitive of expeditious,

inexpensive and less complex settlement of their disputes. In fact the Lok Adalat is a boon

to the litigant public, where they can get their disputes settled fast and free of cost.

Therefore, even the sacred texts of the major religions and also reflections of words of

great philosophers and thinkers are pertinent and evident.16

The ancient concept of settlement of dispute through mediation, negotiation or

through arbitral process known as “people court verdict” or decision of “Nyaya-Panch” is

conceptualized and institutionalized in the philosophy of Lok Adalat. Some people equate

Lok Adalat to conciliation or mediation; some treat it with negotiations and arbitration.

Those who find it different from all these, call it peoples’ Court”. It involves people who

are directly or indirectly affected by dispute resolution. The salient features of this form of

dispute resolution are participation, accommodation, fairness, expectation, voluntariness,

neighborliness, transparency, efficiency and lack of animosity.17

The concept of Lok Adalat was pushed back into non-existence in last few

centuries before independence and particularly during the British regime. Now, this

concept has, once again, been restored. It has, once again, become very popular and well-

known amongst litigants. This is the system which has deep roots in Indian legal history

16 Prof. Nomita Aggarwal, © 2000 - 2006 University of Delhi, University Road, Delhi 110 00
17 See Supra note, 20 page No. 3
245
and its close allegiance to the culture and perception of justice in Indian ethos. Experience

has shown that it is one of the very efficient and important ADRs and most suited to the
18
Indian environment, culture and societal interests.

In our country Lok Adalats have worked very well and satisfactorily. Camps of Lok

Adalat were organized initially in Gujarat in March 1982 and now it has been widespread

throughout the country. The growth of this movement was a part of the strategy to remove

heavy burden on the courts with pending cases. The reason to create such camps were only

the pending cases and to give relief to the litigants who were in a queue to get justice. The

first Lok Adalat was held on March 14, 1982 at Junagarh in Gujarat-the land of Mahatma

Gandhi. Lok Adalats have been very successful in settlement of motor accident claim

cases, matrimonial/family disputes, labour disputes, and disputes relating to public

services such as telephone, electricity, bank recovery cases and so on.19

The finest hour of justice is the hour of compromise when parties after burying

their hatchet re-unite by a reasonable and just compromise. This Indian-institutionalized,

indigenized and now, legalized concept for settlement of dispute promotes the goals of

Constitution. Equal justice and free legal aid are hand in glove. It is, rightly said, since the

Second World War, the greatest revolution in the law has been the mechanism of

evolution of system of legal aid which includes an ADRM. The statutory mechanism of

legal services includes concept of Lok Adalat in the Legal Services Authorities Act. The
OfS
legal aid, in fact, is a fundamental human right.

Indian socio-economic conditions warrant highly motivated and sensitized legal

service programmes as large population of consumers of justice (heart of the judicial

18 Ibid
19 Ibid, page No.5.
20 Supra note, 14

246
anatomy) are either poor or ignorant or illiterate or backward, and, as such, at a

disadvantageous position. The State, therefore, has a duty to secure that the operation of

legal system promotes justice on the basis of equal opportunity. Alternative dispute

resolution is, neatly, worked out in the concept of Lok Adalat. It has provided an

important juristic technology and vital tool for easy and early settlement of disputes. It has

again been proved to be a successful and viable national imperative and incumbency, best

suited for the larger and higher sections of the present society and Indian system. The

concept of legal services, which includes Lok Adalat, is a "revolutionary evolution of


01
resolution of disputes.

The Lok Adalat is another alternative dispute resolution forum, which has the

potential of increasing access to justice. Lok Adalat are informal, flexible, participatory

forums, which have as their purpose the encouragement of settlements, compromises and

avoidance of litigation. Lok Adalat serves as mediation and conciliatory forums, which are

voluntary utilized by the parties to a dispute as a means of understanding their rights and

obligations under the law and of facilitating the settlement or compromise of their

disputes. Lok Adalat received considerable emphasis from 1982 onwards with the advent

of the legal aid movement, as a part of legal aid strategy.22

The concept of Lok Adalat is no longer an experiment in India, but it is an effective

and efficient, pioneering and palliative alternative mode of dispute settlement which is

accepted as a viable, economic, efficient, informal, expeditious form of resolution of

disputes. It is a hybrid or admixture of mediation, negotiation, arbitration and

participation. The true basis of settlement of disputes by the Lok Adalat is the principle of

mutual consent, voluntary acceptance of conciliation with the help of counselors and

2' Ibid
22

247
conciliators. It is a participative, promising and potential ADRM. It revolves around the

principle of creating awareness amongst the disputants to the effect that their welfare and

interest, really, lies in arriving, at amicable, immediate, consensual and peaceful

settlement of the disputes.23

9.4 The Legislation Pertaining to Lok Adalat: The Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987

gave a statutory status to Lok Adalats, pursuant to the Constitutional mandate in Article

39-A of the Constitution of India. It contains various provisions for settlement of disputes

through Lok Adalat. Thus, the ancient concept of Lok Adalat has, now, statutory basis. It

is an Act to constitute legal services authorities to provide free and competent legal

services to the weaker sections of the society to ensure that opportunities for securing

justice are not denied to any citizen by reason of economic or other disabilities, and to

organize Lok Adalats to secure that the operation of the legal system promotes justice on a

basis of equal opportunity.24

9.4.1 Need For Lok Adalat

In the present system, the litigant, who is the heart of judicial anatomy, is the most

neglected segment. He is the consumer of justice and he should be respected. The litigant-

consumer of justice-and heart of the system-must receive equal, effective, inexpensive and

speedy trial and justice. It is imperative to reach the goal of‘equal access to justice, which

is a Constitutional commandment and statutory imperative.25 Juridicare is equally

important, if not more than the Medicare, for the survival of the rule of Law. It, also,

23 ibid
^Institute of Management Ahmedabad, Rule of Alternative Dispute Resolution Method in Development Society,
“Lok Adalat” in India, Anurag K Agarawal, W.P.No. 2005-11-01. P. 7
25 KLJP’s The Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987, Sathhpal Puliani 2003, New Edition. P. 76

248
revives, rejuvenates, restatements and for revivification of values and ethos. It helps to

create renaissance of National Legality and provides a rendezvous for social amity and

affinity and social justice.26

Unmanageable backlog of cases, mounting arrears and inordinate delay in disposal

of cases in courts at all levels-lowest to the highest-coupled with exorbitant expenses-

have undoubtedly attracted the attention of not only the members of the Bar, consumers of

justice (litigants), social activist, legal academics and parliament but also managers of the

court. So huge is the arrears of cases that unless they are disposed of on a war footing the

system may crumble down in a few years time. It appears that the justice system as in

vogue in this country is about collapse. So, it is but natural that the alarming situation of

the Indian judiciary has attracted attention of anyone concerned with law reforms.27 The

sole consideration, therefore, is how to reduce the delay in disposal of cases, make the

system resilient by removing its stratification, making the system less forma and truly

inexpensive so as to bring justice within the reach of the poor.28 Frankly admitting, the

existing legal system has remained unfortunately alien having no living contact with

masses and is not at all meaningful to them. The surprising growth in the arrears of cases

has compelled the members of Law Commission of India to deliberate on the revival of

indigenous legal system30 and recommended it’s restructuring to provide a new model or

mechanism for dissolving disputes on the principles of participatory justice. A need has

been felt for decentralization of the system of administration of justice to reduce the

26 Ibid, p 74
21 Ibid
28 Law Commission of India: One Hundred and Fourteenth Report on Gram Nayayalaya 1986, p. 7.
29 Ibid
30 Report of Legal Aid Committee (Government of Gujarat, 1971), Para 13. 12, p, 209

249
volume of a work31. The former Chief Justice, E S Venkatarahmiah once rightly

observed.32

"The problem of delay and backlog was likely to put the functioning of

Constitutional Government in disarray”

This warning of former chiefjustice carries really a great weight when examined in

the light of piling arrears and accumulated work-load of different courts and poses a

frightening scenario to the very survival of the legal system itself. In various countries,

particularly, in United States and other western countries, the contribution of the Bar in

rendering free and competent legal-aid is praiseworthy and it must be emulated. Legal Aid

fraternity must respond with juristic sensitivity to the voice from the silence zone (a class

of litigants) and mass voice of weak, meek, poor, suppressed and exploited women and

destitute children so as to create evolving ebullient echo for the silent sector. The bar must

evolve scheme to ensure that unprotected is not priced out of market. The Bar is, really, a

backbone of the legal services to compliment and complete the Constitutional obligations

and obtain statutory rights of millions of indigent, needy, handicapped and deserving

people.33

The Purpose of the Lok Adalat was/has been to provide a supplementary to the

mainstream legal system. The sanctity for holding Lok Adalat or people's court lies in the

growing dissatisfaction with the existing legal system and the need for immediate relief

for poor, helpless, economically and socially disadvantages position, etc., who are in

distressed familiar circumstances. The requirement of immediate redressal and speedy

31 Law Commission of India: One Hundred and Fourteenth Report on Gram Nayayalaya 1986, p. 7
32 Shrinvas Gupta, “Judicial Delays Versus Right to Speedy Trial, “Link, May, 24, 1992, p. 32
33 KLJP’s The Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987, Sathhpal Puliani 2003, New Edition.p.77

250
disposal of disputes was felt most acutely in the present socio-legal circumstances. In

view of these circumstances, an attempt was made to bring justice to the door steps. The

Lok Adalat was organized with the following objectives amongst others:

(1) Provide speedy justice.

(2) To generate awareness among the public regarding conciliatory mode of dispute

settlement and legal sanctity of Lok Adalat

(3) To gear up the process of organizing Lok Adalat

(4) To encourage the public to settle their outside the formal set-up

(5) To empower public to participate injustice delivery system

The large population of India and the illiterate masses have found the regular

dispensation of justice through regular courts very cumbersome and ineffective. The

special conditions prevailing in the Indian society and due to the economic structure,

highly sensitized legal service is required which is efficacious for the poor and ignorant

masses. The institution of Lok Adalat tries to resolve the people’s disputes by discussions,

counseling, persuasions and conciliation, which result in quick and cheap justice. As

aforesaid in the objective of the Lok Adalats, the intention of the legislator has been to put

an end to the disputes summarily and reduce the burden of the courts. Therefore, the Lok

Adalats decide the matters on a consent/ compromise basis. The Lok Adalat passes the

award after the parties have agreed on the settlement and have given consent over it. The

Lok Adalat movement is no more an experiment in India. It is now a success and but

needs to be replicated in certain matters.34

34 ibid

251
The object of the Legal Service Authorities Act as stated in its preamble is, that the

Act is enacted by the Parliament to provide free andcompetent legal services by the State

to the weaker sections of the society to secure them speedy justice and to ensure that they

are not deprived of it by reason of economic or other disabilities, and also to organize Lok

Adalat with a view to ensure that the operation of the legal system in the country promotes

justice among citizens on a basis of equal opportunity. In this object contains two

important parts viz., the first part of the preamble covers the subject of the society so as to

ensure that justice is not denied to them by reason of economic and other disabilities. The

later portion of the preamble deals with general object of the Act, which states “and to

organize Lok Adalats to secure that the operation of the legal system promotes justice on a

basis of equal opportunity”. It is broader in its width and sweep aims at securing

successful operation of the legal system towards effective furtherance and promotion of

justice among the litigant public. As far as work load pending in all regular courts our

country is concerned, it is an universally acknowledged fact that the courts are saddled

with heavy and unwieldy burden of arrears of judicial work and it has reached the point of

alarming proportion.

9.4.2 Hierarchy of Bodies Created Under the Act

Under the Act a nationwide channel has been visualized for providing legal aid and

assistance. National Legal Services Authority is the supreme body constituted to lay down

policies and principles for making legal services available under the provisions of the Act

and to frame most effective and economical schemes for legal services. It also distributes

funds and grants to State Legal Services Authorities and NGOs for implementing legal aid

252
schemes and programmes.35 A State Legal Services Authority is constituted in each State

to give effect to the policies and directions of the Central Authority (NALSA) and to

impart legal services to the people and conduct Lok Adalats in the State. State Legal

Services Authority is headed by the Chief Justice of the State High Court who is its

Patron-in-Chief. A serving or retired Judge of the High Court is nominated as its

Executive Chairman.36 District Legal Services Authority is constituted in each District to

implement Legal Aid Programmes and Schemes in the District. The District Judge of the

District is its ex-officio Chairman.37

Taluk Legal Services Committees are in like manner constituted for each of the

Taluk or Mandal or for group of Taluk or Mandals to co-ordinate the activities of legal

services in the Taluk and to organise Lok Adalats. Every Taluk Legal Services Committee

is headed by a senior Civil Judge operating within the jurisdiction of the Committee who

is its ex-officio Chairman.38

9.4.2.1 Supreme Court Legal Services Committee: The Central Authority shall

constitute a Committee to be called the Supreme Court Legal Services Committee for the

purpose of exercising such powers and performing such functions as may be determined

by regulations made by the Central Authority.39

NALSA is laying great deal of emphasis on legal literacy and legal awareness

campaign. Almost all the State Legal Services Authorities are identifying suitable and

trustworthy NGOs through whom legal literacy campaign may be taken to tribal,

35 Section, 3, The Legal Service Authority Act, 1987


36 Ibid, Section, 6
37 Ibid, Section, 9,
38 Ibid, Section 11-A,
39 Section 3-A, The Legal Service Authority Act, 1987
253
backward and far-flung areas in the country. The effort is to publicize legal aid schemes so

that the target group, for whom Legal Services Authorities Act has provided for free legal

aid, may come to know about the same and approach the concerned legal services

functionaries.

9.4.2.2 Organization of Lok Adalats:40 The below mentioned bodies may organize Lok

Adalats at such intervals and places and for exercising such jurisdiction and for such areas

as it thinks fit:

(1) National Legal Service Authority

(2) Supreme Court Legal Services Committee

(3) State Legal Services Authority

(4) High Court Legal Service Committee

(5) District Legal Services Authority

(6) Taluka Legal Services Committee.

Thus the person who needs free legal aid can approach the Legal Services

Authority at any level- national, state, district or taluq. The National Legal Services

Authority (NLA), created by the Central Government, has power to lay down the policy

and give directions to the State Legal Services Authority in this behalf. But National Legal

Services Authority does not directly create any Lok Adalat. Lok Adalat is an ad hoc body

created from time to time by the State Legal Services Authority or District Legal Services

Authority which themselves are the creatures of the State government under powers of

nomination conferred by this Act. The latter operates for a specified area and period of

time in respect of matters which come to it in one of the two ways specified in the Act,

40Ibid, Section, 19

254
that is to say, first, where the District Legal Services Authority refers the dispute and

second, where the presiding officers of the court or tribunal makes a reference on the joint

application of the parties. However it does not indicate that if some of the parties to the

suit make a joint application, while the other do not, even then it will get jurisdiction to

transfer the matter to the Lok Adalat for decision.

9.4.2.3 Procedure of Lok Adalat: The procedure followed at a Lok Adalat is very simple

and shorn of almost all legal formalism and rituals.41 The Lok Adalat is presided over by a

sitting or retired judicial officer as the chairman, with two other members, usually a

lawyer and a social worker. Thus every Lok Adalat organised for an area shall consist of

such number of-

(1) Serving or retired judicial officers; and

(2) Other persons, of the area as may be specified by the State Authority or the District

Authority or the Supreme Court Legal Services Committee or the High Court Legal

Services Committee, or as the case may be, the Taluk Legal Services Committee,

organising such Lok Adalat.

9.4.2.4 Experience and Qualifications: The experience and qualifications of other

persons referred to in clause (b) of sub-section (2) for Lok Adalats organised by the

Supreme Court Legal Services Committee shall be such as may be prescribed by the

Central Government in consultation with the Chief Justice of India.42 The experience and

qualifications of other persons referred to in clause (b) of sub-section (2) for Lok Adalats

41 Indian Institute of Management Ahmedabad, India, Role of ADR Methods in Development of Society: ‘Lok
Adalat’ in India, Anurag K Agarwal, W. P. 2005-11-01 P. 6
42 Section, 19 (3)
255
other than referred to in sub-section (3) shall be such as may be prescribed by the State

Government in consultation with the Chief Justice of the High Court.43

The composition of Lok Adalat is significant. Its members are to be nominated by

State Legal service Authority or District Legal service Authority from among specified

categories, namely, “judicial officers of the area” and ‘such other members possessing

such qualifications and experience as may be prescribed by the State Government.”

Therefore judges in the subordinate judiciary in active services may be nominated, and it

is reasonable to expect that under the second category well-educated social workers, law

college teachers and retired judicial officers may be included. It is not necessary and rather

undesirable to nominate presiding officers of the very court or tribunals before whom the

very cases are pending. Even a semblance or suspicion of coercive pressure or personal

interest will be avoided thereby. It must however be noted that the law permits such

presiding officers to suggest settlement of cases before them to the parties themselves.

What is pointed out here is that they shall not be members of Lok Adalat and pass awards,

outside their court.

9.4.2.5 Jurisdiction:44 A Lok Adalat shall have jurisdiction to determine and to arrive at a

compromise or settlement between the parties to a dispute in respect of-

(i) Pending Cases i.e., the disputes, which have already gone to law courts; or

(ii) Pre-Litigation Cases i.e. the disputes, which have not yet gone to the law

courts. Thus any matter, which is falling within the jurisdiction of, and is

not brought before, any court for which the Lok Adalat is organised:

The Lok Adalat shall have no jurisdiction in respect of any case or matter relating

to an offence not compoundable under any law. Under this provision, the Lok Adalat is
43 Ibid, Section, 19 (4)
44 Ibid Section, 19(5)

256
vested with jurisdiction in respect of any case pending before a court or any matter which

is not before the court, since it can determine and arrive at a compromise or settlement

between the parties to a dispute in respect of any matter falling within the jurisdiction of

any civil, criminal, or revenue court or any tribunal constituted under any law for the time

being in force in the area for which the Lok Adalat was orgainsed. The jurisdiction of a

Lok Adalat is thus explicitly and clearly defined. The expressions used and the purposes

behind are very clear and distinct. This is in consonance with the objects which are

intended to be achieved and furthering the aims under Article 3 9-A of the Constitution of

India. Thus, it has all the powers not only to take up the dispute pending before the court

but also in pursuance of the applications filed before it during the proceedings in fact the

‘Legal Services’ as defined under section 2 (c) of the said Act includes rendering of any

service in the conduct of any case or other legal proceeding before any court or tribunal or

other authority and the giving of advice on any legal matter, the object being to provide

free legal aid service which is also the one enshrined under Article 39-A. Therefore, the

assistance as contemplated is at all levels, not restricted to only those on approaching the

court of law or authority or tribunal. Further it is not only with a view to settle pending

cases but to settle any impending matters and to providing such assistance, this legislation

has stepped in.

There are only two ways in which a Lok Adalat may get seized of a case or

proceedings and begin to exercise jurisdiction. One is laid down in section 20(1) and the

other in section 20 (2). According to section 20(2), the District Legal Services Authority

(DLA) may, on receipt of an application from any person stating that any dispute or mater

pending for compromise or settlement needs to be determined by a Lok Adalat, refer to it,

notwithstanding anything contained in any other law that may be in force. One question,

257
which may arise here, is whether one party alone would be entitled to invoke Lok Adalat

jurisdiction if the other is not willing. In case the answer is in the affirmative would it not

run counter to the sprit of voluntaries and introduce an element of compulsion.?

According to section 20(1), if a case is pending in a court or tribunal and the parties

indicate an intention to compromise or settle it by their joint application, the presiding

officer may pass orders that the matter stands transferred to Lok Adalat instead of dealing

with it any further himself.

Would section 20(2) also cover a case where the matter is amenable to and ripe for

settlement although the parties have not yet instituted any proceedings before a court or

tribunal? If so, it would be in the nature of a preventive measure and a pre-emptive

approach to resolve disputes even at a pre-litigative stage, which should be a welcome

sign. One need not feel it altogether strange. The Krishna Iyer Committee emphasized the

need to give incentives for avoiding litigation and therefore the grant of legal aid in a case

should be on the condition that the assisted person must agree to accept the just

compromise as certified by the Legal Aid Committee concerned or else be disqualified

from receiving any further aid in the matter.

The golden thread running through section 19 is that parties to the litigation should

agree to the reference of the matter to Lok Adalat. In this behalf the parties must be heard

and their consent should be sought. The court’s expedition for speedy justice should not be

unbridled, on the other hand it should observe rule of justice, fair play and good

conscience. In this behalf a special reference to sub-section (4) of section 19 requires to be

made. It reads as under:-

258

", *. * n&;
*****
"Every Lok Adalat shall, while determining any reference before it under

this Act, with utmost expedition to arrive at a compromise or settlement between

the parties and shall be guided by the principles ofjustice, equity, fair play and

other legal principles.45"

On a cumulative reading of sections 18 & 19 of the Act it transpires that before a

case is heard by Lok Adalat, the following conditions should be fulfilled

i) The Lok Adalat should have been organised by the Competent Authority;

ii) While organising the Lok Adalat procedure as laid down in section 18

should have been observed;

iii) While choosing a case for adjudication by Lok Adalat, the consent of the

parties must have been obtained;

iv) That while disposing of the case, the court should abide by the principles of

justice, equity and good conscience.

Lok Adalat can and seems to have the widest possible jurisdiction in the sense that it

can deal with any matter, whatever is its legal character and in whatever court or tribunal it

might be pending, including the highest, i.e., only when parties wish to avail of its services.

Since according to section 2(1) (a) of the Act, legal aid can be provided to a person for a 'case'

which includes a suit or any proceeding before a court. Section 2(1) (aaa) defines the 'court' as

a civil, criminal or revenue court and includes any tribunal or any other authority constituted

under any law for the time being in force, to exercise judicial or quasi-judicial functions. As

per section 2(1 )(c) 'legal service' includes the rendering of any service in the conduct of any

case or other legal proceeding before any court or other authority or tribunal and the giving of

45 Section, 20 (4) Legal Services Authority, Act, 1987.

259
advice on any legal matter. It is true that criminal matters are also included but it will stand to

reason if they should be limited to such matters that could be compromised or compounded

under the law to qualify for settlement by Lok Adalats. Serious crimes would thus be kept

outside its ambit, which is as it should be. The courts can be trusted to so interpret, and the

government expected to frame rules to the same effect, and thereby avoid legal objections to

its jurisdiction on major grounds of high public policy concerning crime and punishment.

While such is the jurisdiction which Lok Adalat can exercise it may do so only if it is

involved by the voluntary decision of parties to the dispute. This is evident from the broad

sweep of the language used in the provisions contained in sections 19(3) and 20(2). Section

(19) declares: thus Lok Adalat shall have wide jurisdiction to determine and arrive at a

compromise or settlement between the parties to a dispute in respect of any matter falling

within the jurisdiction of any civil, criminal, or revenue court or any tribunal constituted under

any law for the time being in force in the area which the Lok Adalat is organized.

9.4.3 Compounding of Offences: The offences punishable under the sections of the Indian

Penal Code (45 of 1860) specified in the first two columns of the Table next following may be

compounded by the persons mentioned in the third column of that Table46:

Table of Compoundable Offences

SI. OFFENCE SECTION OF PERSONS BY WHOM


No THE INDIAN OFFENCE MAY BE
PENAL COMPOUNDED
CODE
1 Uttering words etc., with The person whose religious
deliberate intent to wound the 298 feeling are intended to be
religious feeling of nay person wounded
2 Causing hurt The person to whom the hurt is
323,324
caused

46
Section 320 (l)Cr.P.C
260
3 Wrongfully restraining or The person restrained or
341,342
confining any person confined
4 Assault or use of criminal force The person assaulted r to whom
352,355, 358 criminal force is used.
5 Mischief, when the only loss or The person to whom the loss or
damage caused is loss or 426, 427 damage is caused
damage to a private person
6 Criminal trespass The person in possession f the
447 property trespassed upon
7 House trespass 448 Do
8 Criminal breach of contract of The Person with whom the
491
Services offender has contracted.
9 Adultery 497 The husband of the woman
10 Enticing or taking away or Do
detaining with criminal intent 498
of a married woman.
11 Defamation, except such cases The person defamed
as are specified against section
500 of the IPC (45 of 1860 in 500
column of the Table under sub­
section (2)
12 Printing or engraving matter, The person defamed
501
knowing it to be defamatory,
13 Sale of printed or engraved The person defamed
substance containing
502
defamatory matter, knowing it
to contain such matter
14 Insult intended to provide a The person insulted
504
breach of the peace
15 Criminal intimidation except The person intimidated
when the offence is punishable
506
with imprisonment for seven
years
16 Act caused by making a person The person against whom the
believe that he will be an 508 offence was committed.
object of divine displeasure

The offences punishable under the sections of the Indian Penal Code (45 of I860)

Specified in the first two columns of the table next following may, with the permission of the

Court before which any prosecution for such offence is pending, be compounded by the

persons mentioned in the third Column of that Table47:

47 Section, 320 (2) Cr.P.C

261
TABLE
SI OFFENCE SECTION PERSONS BY WHOM

No OF THE OFFENCE MAY BE


INDIAN COMPOUNDED
PENAL
CODE
1 Voluntary causing hurt by The person to who hurt is
324
dangerous weapons or means caused.
2 Voluntarily causing grievous The person to who hurt is
325
hurt caused
3 Voluntarily causing grievous The person to who hurt is
hurt on grave and sudden 335 caused
provocation.
4 Causing hurt by doing an act The person to who hurt is
so rashly and negligently as to caused
337
endanger human life or the
personal safety or others.
5 Causing grievous hurt by The person to who hurt is
doing an act so rashly and caused
negligently as to endanger 338
human life or the personal
safety or others
6 Wrongfully confining a The person confined
343
person for three days or more.
7 Wrongfully confining for ten The person confined
344
more days
8 Wrongfully confining a The person confined
346
person in secret.
9 Assault or criminal force to The woman assaulted to whom
woman with intent to outrage 354 the criminal force was used.
her modesty.
10 Assault or criminal force in The person assaulted or to
attempt in wrongfully to 357 whom the force was used
confine a person.
11 Theft, where the value of the The owner of the property
property stolen does not stolen
379
exceed two hundred and fifty
rupees.
262
12 Theft, by clerk or servant of in The owner of the property
possession of master, where stolen
the value of the property 380
stolen does not exceed two
hundred and fifty rupees.
12 Dishonest misappropriation of The owner of the property
403
property misappropriated.
13 Criminal breach of trust, The owner of the property in
where the value of the respect of which the breach of
406
property does not exceed two trust has been committed.
hundred and fifty.
14 Criminal breach of trust, The owner of the property in
where by carrier, wharf finger respect of which the breach of
etc. where the value of the 407 trust has been committed.
property does not exceed two
hundred and fifty
15 Criminal breach of trust, by The owner of the property in
clerk or servant where the respect of which the breach of
value of the property does not 408 trust has been committed
exceed two hundred and fifty
rupees.
16 Dishonesty receiving stolen The owner of the property
property, knowing it to be stolen
stolen, when the value of the
411
stolen property does not
exceed two hundred and fifty
rupees.
17 Assisting in the concealment The owner of the property
or disposal of stolen property, stolen
where the value of the stolen 414
property does not exceed two
hundred and fifty rupees.
18 Cheating 417 The person cheated
19 Cheating a person whose The person cheated
interest the offender was
418
bound, either by law or by
legal contract, to protect.
20 Cheating by personation 418 The person cheated
21 Cheating and dishonestly The person cheated
inducing delivery of property
or the making alternation or 419
destruction of a valuable
security.

263
22 Cheating and dishonesty The person cheated
inducing delivery of property
or the making alternation or 420
destruction of a valuable
security.
23 Fraudulently removal or The creditors who are affected
concealment of property, etc., thereby
421
to prevent distribution among
creditors.
24 Fraudulently preventing from The creditors who are affected
being made available for his thereby
422
creditors a debt or demand
due to the offenders.
25 Fraudulently execution of The creditors who are affected
deed of transfers containing thereby
423
false statement of
consideration.
26 Fraudulent removal or The person affected thereby
424
concealment of property
27 Mischief by killing or The person affected thereby
maiming animal of the value 428
of ten rupees or upward.
28 Mischief by killing or The person of the cattle or
maiming cattle, etc., of any animal.
value or any other animal of 429
the value of fifty rupees or
upward.
29 Mischief injury to work of The person to whom the loss or
irrigation by wrongfully damage is caused
diverting water when the only 430
loss or damage caused is loss
or damage to a private person.
30 House-trespass to commit to The person in possession of the
an offence (other than theft) house trespassed
451
punishable with
imprisonment.
31 Using a false trade or property The person to whom loss or
482
mark injury is caused by such use
32 Counterfeiting a trade or The person whose trade or
property marks used by 483 property mark is counterfeited.
another

264
Knowing selling or exposing The person whose trade or
or possessing for sale or for property mark is counterfeited.
33
manufacturing purpose, goods 486
marked with a counterfeit
property mark
34 Marring again during the The husband or wife of the
494
lifetime of a husband or wife. person so marring.
35 Defamation against the The person defamed
President or the Vice
president or the Governor of a
State or the Administers of a
Union territory or a Minister
500
in respect o his conduct in the
discharge of his public
functions when instituted
upon a complaint made by the
Public Prosecutor.
36 Uttering words or sounds or The woman whom it was
making or exhibiting any intended to insult or whose
object intending to insult the privacy was intruded upon.
509
modesty of a woman or
intruding upon the privacy of

a woman.

Any person may set the criminal law in motion, but under this section the only

person named in the third column can legally compound of offence. A case may be

compounded at any time before sentence is pronounced even whilst the Magistrate is

writing the judgment. The Magistrate shall not permit compounding of a case after the

record of the case is called under section 397 with a view to transfer the case, since his

jurisdiction to deal with case ceases after the order calling for the papers is made.

Application for compounding an offence filed after the disposal of an appeal is not

maintainable as at that stage no proceeding is pending. This section provides that if the

offence be compoundable, composition, and shall have the effect of an acquittal. When

265
any offence is compoundable under this section, the abatement of such offence or an

attempt to commit such offence (when such attempt is itself an offence) may be

compounded in like manner.48 When the persons who would otherwise be competent to

compound an offence under this section is under the age of eighteen years or is an idiot or

a lunatic, any person competent to contract on his behalf may, with the permission of the

court, compound such offence.49 When the person who would otherwise be competent to

compound an offence under this section is dead, the legal representative, as defined in the

Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (5 of 1908) of such person may, with the consent of the

court, compound such offence.50 When the accused has been committed for trial or when

he has been convicted and an appeal is pending, no composition for the offence shall be

allowed without the leave of the court to which he is committed, or, as the case may be,

before which the appeal is to be heard.51 A high court or Court of Session acting in the

exercise of its powers of revision under section 401 may allow any person to compound

any offence which such person is competent to compound under this section. No offence

shall be compounded under this section. No offence shall be compounded if the accused

is, by reason of a previous conviction, liable either to enhanced punishment or to a

punishment of a different kind for such offence. The composition of an offence under

this section shall have the effect of an acquittal of the accused with whom the offence has

been compounded.54

9.4.4 Cognizance of Cases by Lok Adalats: The cases which can be taken cognizance by

Lok Adalat is laid down in section 20. Sub-section (1) provides that:

48 Section, 320 (3) Cr.P.C


49 Section, 320 (4) (a) Cr.P.C
50 Section, 320 (4) (b) Cr.P.C
51 Section, 320 (5) Cr.P.C
52 Section, 320 (6) Cr.P.C
53 Section, 320 (7) Cr.P.C
54 Section, 320 (8) Cr.P.C

266
(1) Where in any case referred to in clause (i) of sub-section (5) of section 19, the parties

thereof agree; or Where, in any suit or other proceeding pending before any court or

tribunal, if the parties thereof make a joint application to the court or tribunal indicating

their intention to compromise the matter or to arrive at a settlement, the presiding officer

of the court or tribunal, as the case may be, may, instead of proceeding to effect a

compromise between the parties or to arrive at a settlement himself... pass an order that

the suit or proceeding shall stand transferred to the Lok Adalat for arriving at a

compromise or settlement. The context of the provision indicated that once a joint

application was made to the court by the parties before which the case was pending, it was

imperative on its part to refer the case to Lok Adalat for settlement. Further, if one of the

parties thereof makes an application to the court for referring the case to the Lok Adalat

for settlement and if such court is prima facie satisfied that there are chances of such

settlement; or The court is satisfied that the matter is an appropriate one to be taken

cognizance of by the Lok Adalat, the court shall refer the case to the Lok Adalat:

The phrase “if such court if prima facie satisfied that there are chances of such

settlement” occurring in Section 20 (1) (i) (d) makes it clear that this provision is not a

mandatory provision of law and that it gives sufficient discretion to the court either to

allow or to reject an application made by a party to the case, in the light of peculiar facts

and circumstances thereof. On the other hand, for a court to refer a case to Lok Adalat on

an application by only either party to a case, the said phrase casts an obligation on the

court to apply its mind to the facts of the case and the nature of the dispute, and to get

itself satisfied that there are sufficient chances of settlement of the dispute at the Lok

Adalat and therefore, the referenced of the case by it to Lok Adalat is justified. Proviso to

section 20 (1) (i) (d) provides that no case shall be referred to the Lok Adalat under

267
sub-clause (b) of clause (i) or clause (ii) by such court except after giving a reasonable

opportunity of being heard to the parties.

The concept of “reasonable opportunity of being heard” is part of the concept of

principles of Natural Justice. Natural Justice is one of the most essential concepts of the

Constitutional Law and is of very ancient origin. This may be understood as Justice that is

simple and elementary as distinct from justice that is complex, sophisticated and

technical.55 It is also popularly known as ‘fair play in action,” “social Justice,” “universal

Justice,” “fundamental Justice,” “substantial Justice,” etc. The concept of natural justice

also differs from country to country and the principles applied are not uniform in nature

though the fundamental concept of fair play in action may be the same.56 Thus aim of the

rules of natural justice is to secure justice or to put it negatively to prevent miscarriage of

justice. These rules can operate only in areas not covered by any law validly made. In

other words they do not supplant the law of the land but supplement it.

Thus the Lok Adalat has jurisdiction to determine and arrive at a compromise or

settlement between the parties to a dispute in respect of any matter falling within the

jurisdiction of any civil, criminal, or revenue courts or of any tribunal constituted under

any law for the time being in force for the area for which the Lok Adalat is being

organized. In a case where a pending action or proceeding is referred to Lok Adalat by a

Joint Application of the parties, the Lok Adalat is to proceed to dispose of that proceeding

or matter and arrive at compromise or settle the disputes between the parties. In doing so,

the Lok Adalat must be guided by legal principles and principles ofjustice, equity and fair

play. In a case where no compromise or settlement can be arrived at, it is open to the

parties to the proceeding, to request for transfer of their proceedings before the courts at a
55 John vs. Rees, 1969 (2) All ER 274
56 Maclean vs Workers Union, 1929 1 Ch D 602

268
later stage from which it was transferred. Every award of the Lok Adalat is a civil decree

and every award made by the Lok Adalat is deemed to be final and binding on all parties

to the proceedings or disputes. No appeal lies to any court against such an award. The Lok

Adalat is empowered to exercise substantive powers vested in a civil court under the Code

of Civil Procedure while trying a suit or proceeding.

Notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force,

the Authority or Committee organising the Lok Adalat under sub-section (1) of section 19

may, on receipt of an application from any one of the parties to any matter referred to in

clause (ii) of sub-section (5) of section 19 that such matter needs to be determined by a

Lok Adalat, refer such matter to the Lok Adalat, for determination. However, no matter

shall be referred to the Lok Adalat except after giving a reasonable opportunity of being

heard to the other party.57

Thus, when a person approaches the authority or committee directly with an

application seeking the aid of any legal services under the Act, inasmuch as the exercise of

this power by the Authority or the Committee may refer such matter, when it thought that

it needs to be determined by a Lok Adalat for determination. Where any case is referred

to a Lok Adalat under sub-section (1) or where a reference has been made to it under sub­

section (2), the Lok Adalat shall proceed to dispose of the case or matter and arrive at a
fA

compromise or settlement between the parties. Every Lok Adalat shall, while

determining any reference before it under this Act, act with utmost expedition to arrive at

a compromise or settlement between the parties and shall be guided by the principles of

justice, equity, fair play and other legal principles.59 In the Lok Adalat, where no award is

passed, due to no compromise or settlement could be arrived at between the parties, then
57 Section 20 (2), Legal Service Authority, Act, 1987
i%Ibid, Section, 20 (3)
59 Ibid, Section, 20 (4)
269
the record of the case shall be returned by it to the court, from which the reference has

been received under sub-section (1) for disposal in accordance with law.60 Where no

award is made by the Lok Adalat on the ground that no compromise or settlement could be

arrived at between the parties, in a matter referred to in sub-section (2), that Lok Adalat

shall advice the parties to seek remedy in a court.61 Where the record of the case is

returned under sub-section (5) to the Court, such court shall proceed to deal with such case

from the stage, which was reached before such reference under sub-section (l).62

There is a salutary provision to the effect that Lok Adalat shall act with utmost

expedition in bringing about a compromise, “guided by legal principles and the principles

of justice, equity and fair play.” In case it finds that it is not in a position to pass an award

because efforts to bring about a compromise proved unsuccessful it is open to the parties

to continue such suit or proceedings so transferred from the stage at which it was earlier

transferred to Lok Adalat. Similarly, the concerned party may institute proceedings in the

proper court if not already done at the time of application to Lok Adalat. It is not clear

what exactly is intended when the Act calls upon Lok Adalat to be guided by “legal

principles”, as distinguished from justice, equity and fair play.” One hopes that “legal

principles” would be understand and interpreted broadly so as a whole but not the

statutory principles of a substantive or procedural law as such. Either those words are a

surplusage or intended to tell Lok Adalat that it should ensure that the compromise or

settlement is not quite at variance with, if not opposed to basic principles of the applicable

law, whether it be the Hindu Succession Act 1956, the Motor Vehicles Act 1939, the

Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956, the Land Acquisition Act 1894 or section

125, Criminal Procedure code 1973 (Cr PC), etc. Thereby it might be possible to ensure
60 Ibid, Section, 20 (5)
61 Ibid, Section, 20 (6)
62 Ibid, Section, 20 (7)
270
that one party to the compromise is not made the underserved and innocent victim of an

unholy compromise and travesty of justice and that must be prevented by Lok Adalat

under all circumstances. The noble cause of justice shall not be distorted or defiled in the

name of its expeditious administration, especially through the instrumentality of Lok

Adalat. Section 21 provides that every award of the Lok Adalat shall be deemed to be a

decree of a civil court or, as the case may be, an order of any other court and where a

compromise or settlement has been arrived at, by a Lok Adalat in a case referred to it

under sub-section (I) of section 20, the court-fee paid in such case shall be refunded in the

manner provided under the Court Fees Act, (7 of 1870).63

Under this section an award of Lok Adalat shall be deemed to be a decree of a civil

court. Hence an award is enforceable as a decree and it is final. Though the award of a Lok

Adalat is not a result of a contest on merits just as a regular suit by a court on a regular

trial, however, it is as equal and on par with a decree on compromise and will have the

same binding effect and conclusive. Just as the decree passed on compromise cannot be

challenged in a regular appeal, the award of Lok Adalat being akin to the same, cannot be

challenged by any regular remedies available under law including invoking Article 226 of

the Constitution of India challenging the correctness of the award on any ground. Thus

judicial review cannot be invoked.

The most important factor to be considered while deciding the cases at the Lok

Adalat is the consent of both the parties. It can not be forced on any party that the matter

has to be decided by the Lok Adalat. However, once the parties agree that the matter has

to be decided by the Lok Adalat, then any party cannot walk away from the decision of the

Lok Adalat. In several instances, the Supreme Court has held that if there was no consent

63 Ibid, Section, 21

271
the award of the Lok Adalat is not executable and also if the parties fail to agree to get the

dispute resolved through Lok Adalat, the regular litigation process remains open for the

contesting parties. The Supreme Court has also held that compromise implies some

element of accommodation on each side. It is not apt to describe it as total surrender. A

compromise is always bilateral and means mutual adjustment. Settlement is termination of

legal proceedings by mutual consent. If no compromise or settlement is or could be

arrived at, no order can be passed by the Lok Adalat. Every award made by a Lok Adalat

shall be final and binding on all the parties to the dispute, and no appeal shall lie to any

court against the award. One issue which raises its head often is the finality of the award

of the Lok Adalat. During the Lok Adalat, the parties agree to abide by the decision of the

judge at the Lok Adalat. However, it is often seen that later, the same order is challenged

on several grounds. In one of the recent decisions, the Supreme Court of India has once

again laid to rest all such doubts. In unequivocal terms, the Court has held that award of

the Lok Adalat is as good as the decree of a Court. The award of the Lok Adalat is

fictionally deemed to be decrees of Court and therefore the courts have all the powers in

relation thereto as it has in relation to a decree passed by itself. This includes the powers to

extend time in appropriate cases. The award passed by the Lok Adalat is the decision of

the court itself though arrived at by the simpler method of conciliation instead of the

process of arguments in court.

It is a matter of satisfaction that the Act directs a refund of court fee already paid

“in the matter provided under the Court Fee Act 1870” where the compromise efforts bear

fruit and culminate in an award passed by Lok Adalat. This fulfils an oft-repeated demand.

There was no provision earlier even where immediately after framing of the issue a

compromise is effected by the parties. It was being urged that in such a case the whole

272
court fee should be refunded, and one fourth or a half where it is compromised at later

stages. The reason is that the time of the court is saved and a desirable social objective is

achieved, by the compromise The Act therefore makes salutary and welcome changes in

the matter of refund of the court fee.

The key provision of Act is comprised in section 20 (3) read with section 21 (1). As

per that section, where any suit or proceedings is transferred to a Lok Adalat under sub­

section (1) of section or where a reference has been made to it under sub-section (2) of

section, it shall proceed to dispose of the suit, proceedings, dispute or matter and arrive at

a compromise or settlement between the parties. Such determination is to be considered by

implication, as an award passed by it. Therefore every such award shall be deemed to be a

decree of a civil court or an order of any other court or tribunal. Section 21(2) declares

such award as final, with no right of appeal. This appears to be the most important change

brought about in the Act whereby binding effect is given to the award of Lok Adalat

embodying a compromise or settlement.

The Lok Adalat passes the award with the consent of the parties, therefore there is

no need either to reconsider or review the matter again and again, as the award passed by

the Lok Adalat shall be final. Even under Section 96 of C.P.C, it is provided that "no

appeal shall lie from a decree passed by the Court with the consent of the parties". The

award of the Lok Adalat is an order by the Lok Adalat under the consent of the parties,

and it shall be deemed to be a decree of the Civil Court, therefore an appeal shall not lie

from the award of the Lok Adalat.64 The High Court held65 that "the provisions of the Act

shall prevail in the matter of filing an appeal and an appeal would not lie under the

provisions of Section 96 C.P.C. Lok Adalat is conducted under an independent enactment


64 Under Section, 96 C.P.C.
65 In Punjab National Bank v. Lakshmichand Rai, 2000 INDLAW MP 201, AIR 2000 MP 301

273
and once the award is made by Lok Adalat the right of appeal shall be governed by the

provisions of the Legal Services Authorities Act when it has been specifically barred

under Provisions of Section 21(2), no appeal can be filed against the award under Section

96 C.P.C." The Court further stated that "It may incidentally be further seen that even the

Code of Civil Procedure does not provide for an appeal under Section 96 against a consent

decree. The Code of Civil Procedure also intends that once a consent decree is passed by

Civil Court finality is attached to it. Such finality cannot be permitted to be destroyed,

particularly under the Legal Services Authorities Act, as it would defeat the very aim and

object of the Act with which it has been enacted.

The High Court of Andhra Pradesh held, in Board of Trustees of the Port of

Visakhapatnam v. Presiding Officer, Permanent, Lok Adalat-c' The award is enforceable

as a decree and it is final. The endeavour is only to see that the disputes are narrowed

down and make the final settlement so that the parties are not again driven to further

litigation or any dispute. Though the award of a Lok Adalat is not a result of a contest on

merits just as a regular suit by a Court on a regular suit by a Court on a regular trial,

however, it is as equal and on par with a decree on compromise and will have the same

binding effect and conclusive just as the decree passed on the compromises cannot be

challenged in a regular appeal. It was observed by the court:

"The truth is, a judgment by consent is intended to put a stop to litigation

between the parties just as much as is a judgment which results from the

decision of the Court after the matter has been fought out to the end. And / think

it would be very mischievous if one were not to give a fair and reasonable

interpretation to such judgments, and were to allow questions that were really

274
involved in the action to be fought over again in a subsequent action."

In the above judgments, it has clearly been laid down that, a matter of consent

decree need not go on an appeal. However, the power of judicial review in a given case

is implicit under the Constitution unless expressly excluded by a provision of the

Constitution. This power is available to correct any order passed by a statutory

authority which is violative of any of the provisions of the statute. The Lok Adalat is a

creation of statute and gets jurisdiction from it and hence this Court is competent to go

into an order passed by it, to decide whether the order in question is valid in law. The

writ jurisdiction of the High Court cannot be circumscribed by provisions of any

enactment as is to be found in Section 21 of the Act and it can always exercise its

jurisdiction if an order, left alone, would amount to abrogating the rule of law.

9.5 Powers of Lok Adalats. The Lok Adalat have been conferred power of the Civil court

under the C.P.C for the purpose of holding any determination under this Act, while trying

a suit and Every proceedings of the Lok Adalat66 shall be deemed to be judicial

proceedings for the purpose of

The summoning and enforcing the attendance of any witness and examining him on

oath.67 The discovery and production of any document.68 The reception of evidence on

affidavit.69 The requisitioning of any public record or document or copy of such record or

document from any court or office; and70 Such other matters as may be prescribed.71

66 Ibid, Section, 22
67 Ibid Section, 22 (a)
68 Ibid, Section, 22 (b)
69 Ibid. Section, 22 (c)
70 Ibid, Section, 22 (d)
71 Ibid Section, 22 (e)
275
Without prejudice to the generality of the powers contained in sub-section (1),

every Lok Adalat shall have the requisite powers to specify its own procedure for the

determination of any dispute coming before it.72 All proceedings before a Lok Adalat shall

be deemed to be judicial proceedings within the meaning of sections 193, 219 and 228 of

the Indian Penal Code (45 of 1860) and every Lok Adalat shall be deemed to be a civil

court for the purpose of section 195 and Chapter XXVI of the Code of Criminal

Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974).73

The Act gives to Lok Adalat the powers of civil court in respect of summoning and

enforcing attendance of any witness and examining him on oath: discover and production

of any document: reception of evidence on affidavits; requisitioning of any public record,

document from any court or office, and other matters to be prescribed by rules framed

under the Act. In addition, it can specify its own procedure for the determination of any

dispute coming before it. Proceedings before it are deemed to be judicial proceeding and

members public servants.74

9.6 Advantages of Lok Adalat: There are many advantages that litigant gets through the

Lok Adalats. They are

(1) Court Fee: First, there is no court fee and even if the case is already filed in the

regular court, the fee paid will be refunded if the dispute is settled at the Lok

Adalat.

(2) No Strict Application of Procedural Laws: there is no strict application of the

procedural laws and the Evidence Act while assessing the merits of the claim by the

Lok Adalat. The parties to the disputes though represented by their advocate can

12 Ibid, Section,22 (2)


73 Ibid, Section, 22 (3)
74 Section, 22

276
interact with the Lok Adalat judge directly and explain their stand in the dispute

and the reasons therefor, which is not possible in a regular court of law.

(3) Disputes can be Directly Referred to Lok Adalat: disputes can be brought before

the Lok Adalat directly instead of going to a regular court first and then to the Lok

Adalat

(4) Award Binding on the Parties: the decision of the Lok Adalat is binding on the

parties to the dispute and its order is capable of execution through legal process. No

appeal lies against the order of the Lok Adalat whereas in the regular law courts

there is always a scope to appeal to the higher forum on the decision of the trial

court, which causes delay in the settlement of the dispute finally. The reason being

that in a regular court, decision is that of the court but in Lok Adalat it is mutual

settlement and hence no case for appeal will arise. In every respect the scheme of

Lok Adalat is a boon to the litigant public, where they can get their disputes settled

fast and free of cost.

(5) Expeditious Remedy: Last but not the least, faster and inexpensive remedy with

legal status.

(6) Peace in the Society: The system has received laurels from the parties involved in

particular and the public and the legal functionaries, in general. It also helps in

emergence of jurisprudence of peace in the larger interest of justice and wider

sections of society. Its process is voluntary and works on the principle that both

parties to the disputes are willing to sort out their disputes by amicable solutions.

Through this mechanism, disputes can be settled in a simpler, quicker and cost-

effective way at all the three stages i.e. pre-litigation, pending-litigation and post­

litigation.

277
(7) Convenient: Overall effect of the scheme of the Lok Adalat is that the parties to

the disputes sit across the table and sort out their disputes by way of conciliation in

presence of the Lok Adalat Judges, who would be guiding them on technical legal

aspects of the controversies.

(8) Reduces the Burden of the Court: The scheme also helps the overburdened Court

to alleviate the burden of arrears of cases and as the award becomes final and

binding on both the parties, no appeal is filed in the Appellate Court and, as such,

the burden of the Appellate Court in hierarchy is also reduced. The scheme is not

only helpful to the parties, but also to the overburdened Courts to achieve the

Constitutional goal of speedy disposal of the cases. About 90% of the cases filed in

the developed countries are settled mutually by conciliation, mediation etc. and, as

such, only 10% of the cases are decided by the Courts there. In our country, which

is developing, has unlike the developed countries, number of Judges

disproportionate to the cases filed and, hence, to alleviate the accumulation of

cases, the Lok Adalat is the need of the day.

9.7 Disadvantages of Lok Adalat System

(1) Cases Placed Before Lok Adalat: In fact Lok Adalat is brought into force to settle

the cases quickly but in reality number of cases placed before the Lok Adalat

delayed beyond imagination and parties might have spent large sums in the form of

court fee, advocates fee and other miscellaneous expenses.

(2) Litigant is Not Living Person: Majority the cases placed before the Lok Adalat

i.e., to the extent of about 90 % are not between living persons, but against non

living persons. They are Motor Vehicles Accidents Claims Cases, Bank Suits,

Telephone bills cases, Electricity Board cases, Municipal cases Panchayat cases

278
and in these cases Bank, Electricity Board, Municipal Corporation are only legal

persons. Here the aggrieved persons are faced with bureaucratic torture. Usually in

these cases meeting are held with the officers prior to sitting of Lok Adalat and Lok

Adalats are held with best minimum norms fare as discussed and finalized in the prior

sittings. After fixing the norms, the parties are not required to be persuaded for

amicable settlement at Lok Adalats. But these cases are kept in Lok Adalats to show a

statistical success of disposal of cases. In cases of insurance, meeting with the officers

of the companies are held in advance, the matters are discussed on several

considerations without participation of other side (which is opposed to principles of

natural justice). These are few cases, which are said to be decided justly. Most of the

cases relating to compensations are settled not to the advantages of claimants.

(3) The Presiding Officers Not to Act as Facilitator But act as Judges: The presiding

officers of Lok Adalat are chosen from the retired judicial officers and others of that

area who are having prescribed qualifications and experience. But usually these

officers are not in a position to convince the parties for the settlement of cases in an

amicable manner, since they are not trained members. Especially the presiding officer

of the court mentality is just like in adversarial proceedings and tries to behave just like

he is sitting in the court and plays not an active rule but passive rule. He ignores that he

is only facilitator but not decision maker as judge. Other members who conduct Lok

Adalat by the nature do not fall in line with their brother members in Lok Adalat and

invite adverse remarks of their superiors.

(4) Technical Matters and Other Matters: The Lok Adalat is not trying to settle

technical matters and other suits like partition, partnership, trust, contracts and

easements or such other family disputes are generally not touched by Lok Adalats.

279
(5) Lok Adalat Not Settling the Cases Afresh: The members of National Legal

Service Authority, Supreme Court Legal Services Committee, State Legal Services

Authority, High Court Legal Service Committee, District Legal Services Authority

and Taluka Legal Services Committee are organizing Lok Adalat with an intention

to settle the cases which are referred to Lok Adalat afresh but many of these cases

are being settled in advance by pre-arranged meeting between three parties and they

are being shown as disposal of cases during the Lok Adalats. The judges do not

accept the compromise already arrived at by the parties and persuade the parties or

their advocates to keep the matter alive till this Lok Adalat is organized to highlight

higher figures of disposal.

Delhi High Court has given a landmark decision highlighting the significance of

Lok Adalat movement which has far reaching ramifications.75 The petitioner filed a writ

petition for restoration of electricity at his premises, which was unplugged by the Delhi

Vidyut Board (DVB) due to non-payment of Bill, before Delhi High Court. Inter alia, the

grievances of the citizens were not only restricted to the DVB but also directed against the

State agencies like DDA, Municipal Corporation, MTNL, GIC and other bodies. In fact

court notices were directed to be issued to NALSA and Delhi State Legal Service

Authority. Anil Dev Singh J passed the order giving directions for setting up of

permanment Lok Adalats. He noted that “there should also be one or more permanent Lok

Adalats, depending upon the magnitude of the work, for resolving the disputes between

(1) the citizens and the Government of India, and (2) the Government of India and its

employees." The need of the hour is frantically beckoning for setting up Lok-Adalats on

permanent and continuous basis. What we do today will shape our tomorrow. Lok Adalat

7SAbdul Hasan and National Legal Services Authority - Petitioner Vs. Delhi Vidyut Board and others. AIR 1999
Delhi H. C. P. - 88.
280
is between an ever-burdened Court System crushing the choice under its own weight and

alternative dispute resolution machinery including an inexpensive and quick dispensation

of justice. The Lok Adalat and alternative dispute resolution experiment must succeed

otherwise the consequence for an over burdened court system would be disastrous. The

system needs to inhale the life giving oxygen of justice through the note. Subsequently,

the Hon’ble Delhi High Court directed that Government should establish Lok Adalats for

all Government Ministries/Departments. The court has also ordered that the Union Law

Secretary, the Member-Secretary, NALSA and the Member-Secretary of the Delhi State

Legal Services Authority shall be responsible for monitoring the setting up of these Lok

Adalats. Accordingly, all Ministries/Departments of the Government of India were

requested to take immediate steps for the Constitution of separate Lok Adalats in each

Department. However, having regard to the practical difficulties in the setting up of

separate Lok Adalats in each individual Ministry/Department which may or may not have

significant number of disputes either pending in courts or in a pre-litigative stage, a need

was felt that a uniform scheme should be drawn up for the effective implementation of the

directions of the Delhi High Court.76 There is considerable conceptual shrinkage in the

statutory idea of Lok Adalat. There is a Lok Adalat movement in the country which

outstrips the conceptual limitations. Many States have shown enthusiasm for this versatile

phenomenon of informal justice with easy finality and community orientation. Gujurat has

set a record in this experiment: thanks to the Chief Justice taking vigorous personal

interest. Similarly, Andhra Pradesh has produced results in conciliation. Tamil Nadu also

is doing good work and is a model. In many respects, judges charged with the

responsibility of organizing Lok Adalats in these States and in Maharashtra, Rajasthan and

76 In C.W.P. No.3003/99 {NALSA v. DVB)


281
elsewhere have worked with inspired zeal. In Karnataka, the Law Minister has dedicated

himself with restless wanderlust and soulful commitment, to this task and is a sort of Lok

Adalat personified. In a few States like Kerala State Legal Aid Boards have proved

disappointing in their Lok Adalat performance, although partly made up for by a voluntary

agency (People’s Council for Social Justice), headed by a retired judge. The drive behind

the Lok Adalats is the roused consciousness of the community to prevent disruption of

local unity and to secure substantial equity and social justice, in a mood of human

solidarity. In many places, Lok Adalats are transfigured as People’s Festivals of Justice.

The participants are not merely judicial officers or lawyers as envisaged in Section 19 (2).

Or justice, equity and fairplay (vide Sec 19 (4) which means, again, common law) and the

settlements are not necessarily according to legal principles. But with an eye on social

goals like ending feuds, restoring family peace and providing for destitute. Law or no law

social workers, welfare activists’ village elders and respected intellectuals, apart from law

persons, must be involved in these melds. Revenue Officials, Police officials, Block

Development officers and other, department people must help find solutions. Even

prisoners’ conditions and grievances can be resolved here. The matters which come before

these justice melas are not merely litigations or potential litigations, (as myopically set

down in Sec 20) but family frictions , neighborly quarrels, local complaints against anti­

social elements and other public grievances Administrative benefits like old age pensions,

window pensions. Often delayed by the file methodology and paper logged processes

should be tackled here cutting through red-type and other conditions. Relief as accelerated

and forthwith granted if concerned officials respond sensitively. Section 20, it is obvious,

hardly has this community orientation, and has primarily a litigation obsession, as the notes

282
on the clauses indicate Lok Adalats are not only for reducing docket backlogs but for

community togetherness, equitable reliefs and deep-rooted, not formal justice. Conciliation of

actual litigation or prospective litigation as often proved to be statuary failure. In the late ‘30s,

in India many States had conciliation Boards under specific legislations. There was a statutory

stay of matters pending before the Conciliation Boards. Very few cases were settled. Many

cases got delayed, and the Act had a backlash of abuse by clever litigants. In fact section 20 is

not merely narrow in its outlook but may face the fate of the old conciliation Boards futile

exercises prolonging disputes. Another danger is that claims may get barred while the Lok

Adalats are considering disputes. The limitation Act does not wait for Lok Adalats. Moreover

there is no time bound procedure and since the settlement agencies are judicial people the

formalisms of the courts may be dramatized over again. What is more vicious or thoughtless

is that judges are asked to mediate. If they fail and the case goes to the court will there not be

an allegation of bias? Sitting judges being conciliators has its own perils. That is why in many

Lok Adalats now retired judicial people, elderly lawyers and social activists are the main

mediatory resource persons. The sitting judges lend dignity and credibility to the praxis by

their presence. The regular Lok Adalats have by and large, been worthwhile and they must

continue to be held regularly. But it cannot be ignored that Lok Adalats have been

successful mainly in land acquisition and motor accidents claims matters and the like.

They have not been successful in the field of ordinary civil litigation. A major factor for

this is, of course, the reluctance of many members of the Bar to persuade their clients to

go before the Lok Adalats. These members of the Bar would rather like that the dispute was

litigated and their fees earned. At the same time, we must recognise that members of the Bar

have a credible reason to give for not advising clients to go before the Lok Adalats. An

impression has long gained ground that the principal purpose of a Lok Adalat is not to facilitate

the settlement of disputes but the glorification of the invitees and the hosts.

283
9.8 Pre-Litigation Conciliation and Settlement: In India, during the last few years Lok

Adalat has been organized continuously and permanently in every district centre. In taluk

centres too sittings of Lok Adalats have been held successfully. A few thousands of pending

cases and disputes which had not reached law courts have been settled through Lok Adalats.

In spite of this fact, in India the constitution of Permanent Lok Adalat is inevitable, since

when pending cases which were/ are referred to Lok Adalat and the said cases not settled or

compromised in Lok Adalat then same case shall be returned to the court, which case has

been referred, on account of lack of decision making power, though the case involves an

element of settlement. The inflexible attitude shown by one of the parties will render the

entire process ineffective. Under the present set-up,even if all the members of the Lok Adalat

are of the opinion that the case is a fit one for settlement, they cannot take a decision unless all

the parties consent. The then Hon'ble Chief Justice Dr. A. S. Anand in his inaugural address at

the second annual meet of the State Legal Services Authorities, 1999, airing him opinions

stated thus:

"There will be no harm if Legal Services Authorities Act is suitably

amended to provide that in case, in a matter before it, the Judges of the Lok

Adalats are satisfied that one of the parties is unreasonably opposing a

reasonable settlement and has no valid defence whatsoever against the claim of

the opposite party, they may pass an award on the basis of the materials before

them without the consent of one or more parties. It may also be provided that

against such awards, there would be one appeal to the court to which the appeal

would have gone if the matter had been decided by a court.... This course, I think,

would give relief to a very large number of litigants coming to Lok Adalats at

pre-litigative stage as well as in pending matters."

284
In 2002, however, the Parliament brought about certain amendments to the Legal

Services Authorities Act, 1987. The said amendment introduced Chapter VI-A with the

caption pre litigation conciliation and settlement. The "Permanent Lok Adalats (PLA)" may

be constituted at different places taking into consideration the cases in respect of Public

Utility Services (PUS).77

If there is a dispute regarding PUS, any party to such a dispute can, before bringing it

to a court of law for adjudication, present an application to PLA for the settlement of that

dispute. The party presenting such application need not be a party who raises a claim against a

public utility service. If a claim is made by one against a public utility service, the

establishment carrying out the public utility service can also raise that dispute before PLA to

resolve it. The only limitation is that PLA shall not have jurisdiction to consider a dispute

relating to an offence not compoundable under any law or any matter where the value of the

property in dispute exceeds Rs 10 lakhs. But the Central Government can, by an appropriate

notification, increase this limit. Once an application has been made to PLA by one party, no

party to that application shall invoke the jurisdiction of any court in the same dispute.78

Permanent Lok Adalat has to be set up by the National Legal Services Authority or the State

Legal Services Authorities. It shall have three members; the Chairman, who is or has been a

District Judge or an Additional District Judge or has held a judicial office higher in rank than

that of a District Judge and two other members having adequate experience in public utility

service. Such persons shall be appointed by the State or the Central Authority, as the case may

be, upon nomination by the respective Governments.79 But at the same time, such nomination

shall be on the recommendation of the Central or the State Authority. When an application is

filed raising a dispute, the parties shall be directed to file written statements with appropriate

77 Section, 22-B
78 Section, 22-C (1)
79 Section, 22-B
285
proof, including documents and other evidence.80 Copies of documents produced and

statements made by the parties shall be given to each other. Thereafter PLA shall conduct

conciliation proceedings between the parties to bring about an amicable settlement to the

dispute. It is the primary duty of PLA, while conducting such conciliation proceedings; it is

incumbent on the members of PLA to assist the parties to reach an amicable settlement.81 The

parties are also required to co-operate in good faith with Permanent Lok Adalat. If Permanent

Lok Adalat is of the opinion that "there exists elements of settlement in such proceedings,

which may be acceptable to the parties", it shall formulate the terms of possible settlement,

communicate its observations to the parties and if the parties agree, the settlement shall be

signed and an award shall be passed in terms of such settlement and copies of the award shall

be furnished to the parties.82 It is also provided that in cases where there exist elements of

settlement, but the parties fail to reach at an agreement, "the Permanent Lok Adalat shall, if

the dispute does not relate to any offence, decide the dispute.83 "For the purpose of holding

any determination" the Permanent Lok Adalat shall have the same powers as are vested in a

civil court under the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 while trying a suit, in respect of

summoning and enforcing of attendance and examining of witnesses, discovery or production

of documents, reception of evidence on affidavits, requisitioning of public records and

documents and such other matter as the Government may prescribe. PLA can specify its own

procedure for deciding the dispute coming before it and the proceedings shall be deemed to be

judicial proceedings.84

The award of PLA, whether made on merit or on settlement shall be final and binding

on parties and be deemed to be a decree of a civil court. It shall be executed as if it is a decree

80 Section, 22-C(3)
81 Section, 22-C(4).
82 Section, 22-C(7)
83 Section, 22-C (8)
84 Section, 22
286
of a civil court having jurisdiction in respect of the dispute involved. But the award cannot be

called in question in any "original suit, application or execution proceedings". This, in effect,

is the scheme of the amendment establishing a Permanent Lok Adalat.85

9.9 Criticism of Amendment

The amendment providing for PLA has been criticized on various grounds: the lawyers

have opposed the amendment

The contention of the lawyers is that the government has intentionally degraded the

fact that litigants come to the courts not for mere disposal of cases but for getting justice. In

an ideal situation, the former should have taken precedence over the latter.

The PLA is given the power to decide a dispute when the parties do not agree for a

settlement. While deciding the dispute, it is made clear that the provisions of the Code of Civil

Procedure, 1908 and the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 will not have application. In fact, the

determination or decisions will be in a summary manner. As already mentioned above, PLA is

given ample power in the matter of reception of evidence, examination of witnesses etc. this

power similar that of a civil court has. A decision is possible only in those cases where in the

opinion of the Permanent Lok Adalat "there exist elements of settlement". In those cases, PLA

formulates the terms of a possible settlement and gives such terms to the parties concerned for

their observations. These observations will be considered on the basis of evidence produced

by the parties. If they do not come to a settlement, PLA shall decide the dispute. That means,

PLA is not given the power to decide every dispute coming before it. Only those disputes

where there exist elements of settlement can be decided by the Permanent Lok Adalat. The

decision or the opinion of the Permanent Lok Adalat as to whether there exist elements of

settlement is also a matter which can be subjected to judicial review under Article 226 of the

Constitution of India. Therefore, there shall be a check in that respect as well. Such an

85 Section 25-E
287
arbitrary power given to PLA shall be deleted in order to protect legitimate dispute which

cannot be settled in PLA. But this may be overruled on account of the fact that, it is ensured in

the Act that while deciding the dispute on merit, PLA shall be guided by the "principles of

natural justice, objectivity, fair play, equity and other principles of justice". Thus, a fair

procedure is always envisaged. Therefore, there is no reason for any criticism on the power

granted to PLA to decide the dispute in the event of a settlement not being arrived at despite

the existence of an element of settlement. In spite of non-application Civil Procedure Code,

1908 (CPC) and the Indian Evidence Act, 1982, (IEA) the Lok Adalat orders have same status

as civil court order. The award made by the Permanent Lok Adalat under this Act shall be by

a majority of the persons constituting the Permanent Lok Adalat. But others members do not

have any legal training. Thus this Act allowing the two non-judicial members to overrule the

only judicial member, which in turn may result the potential injustice. Apart from these

members having vested interest, but are also vulnerable subject to corruption since they

belong to Public Utility Services. The award of permanent Lok Adalat is final and binding.

The aggrieved party cannot prefer either the appeal or revision etc. But Act provides no

explanation about the situation when PLA does not follow the principles of natural justice and

fair play. Since when there is unjust order no one can question. Section 22C deals with the

cognizance of case by permanent Lok Adalat, when the value of the property does not exceed

Rs.10 lakhs. Nevertheless one of the parties moves an application to the Permanent Lok

Adalat then other party (i.e., opposite party) is not allowed to invoke the jurisdiction of

any court in the same dispute, irrespective of whether he is interested or not. By the

establishment of Permanent Lok Adalat the existing of jurisdiction of civil courts over the

subjects listed under section 22A (b) ‘public utility services’ is transferred to it. Since as

per that section permanent Lok Adalat enjoys the jurisdiction over public utility services

288
in which government is always a party to the dispute. By moving an application before

Permanent Lok Adalat, the government compels the other opposite party to approach

Permanent Lok Adalat contrary to the provisions of section 9 of the Civil Procedure Code,

1908. Section 22E (i) is a very harsh section, as it makes the award of the permanent Lok

Adalat final. Since a remedy available in the form of suit before a court is converted to

another form of an application before Permanent Lok Adalat. Conclusion of case in the

form of suit by the court results in a judgement and decree, which is appealable. Whereas

conclusion of an application before Permanent Lok Adalat results in an award, which is,

half backed justice and declared final. This results in denying the access to justice, which

is contrary to the spirit of Indian Constitution. Lok Adalat is a tribunal whose awards are

appealble as laid down by Supreme Court of India and further judicial review of the

court should not be taken away by any law as it is one of the basic features of the

Constitution of India.87 Because the remedy available to a party under Civil Procedure

Code, 1908, is provided by the judiciary, wherein full-fledged judges are involved and the

remedy under the Permanent Lok Adalat is provided by the executive action (i.e.,

members of the committee of Permanent Lok Adalat appointed\nominated by the

executive), which is contrary to Article 50 of the Constitution of India which stipulates

separation of judiciary from executive.

This criticism can also be overruled, since it cannot be said that there is no appeal

against the decision of PLA. So far as the ordinary Lok Adalats (LA) are concerned “which is

in existence even prior to the amendment and is still being continued” no appeal will lie

against an award of that Lok Adalat. The ordinary LA adopts only a conciliatory method and

86 L. Chandra Kumar vs. Union ofIndia AIR 1997 SC 1125


87 Kesavananda Bharathi vs. State of Kerala, AIR, 1973 SC

289
does not decide a dispute. Therefore, disputes are settled on consent of the parties. When a

dispute is settled based on consent, no appeal need lie from any such order or award even if

there is a settlement in court. Under the civil procedure law also no appeal shall lie from a

decree passed on consent of the parties. This is the reason the Act declares that "no appeal

shall lie to any court against the award" of ordinary Lok Adalat (LA) envisaged in Chapter VI

of the Act. Certainly, appeal will lie only if it is provided somewhere by law. Otherwise, one

cannot file an appeal. It seems that the provision of Section 96(1) CPC could be relied on to

establish that an appeal is not excluded. As already mentioned above, the award of PLA has

all the attributes of a civil court decree and it is deemed as a decree of a civil court. Section

96(1) of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 provides:

“Save where otherwise expressly provided in the body of this Code or by

any other law for the time being in force, an appeal shall lie from every decree

passed by any court exercising original jurisdiction to the court authorized to

hear appeals from the decisions ofsuch court."

When the award of PLA is treated as a decree of civil court and as it is not

otherwise provided in the Legal Services Authorities Act, that no appeal shall lie from

such award, necessarily, that being deemed a civil court decree, an appeal shall lie from

that decree. An award of PLA shall be executed by a civil court "having local jurisdiction"

depending upon the amount of the decree. Necessarily, an appeal shall also lie to a court

depending upon the quantum of the amount involved in the decree or to the High Court

being a decision of a body consisting of three persons of which a District Judge or a

retired District Judge is the Chairman. So there is possibility for a judicial review in an

appeal. In the case of the awards of ordinary Lok Adalat (LA), the statute specifically

290
provides that it shall not be challenged in an appeal. But the very same legislature did not

legislate such a provision when it dealt with the award of PLA. The manifest difference in

the provisions relating to the awards of PLA and LA is not accidental.

The difference really means that an appeal is possible against an award of PLA in

terms of Section 96(1) of the Code of Civil Procedure, when it is not specifically barred by

the Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987 and as the award has all the attributes of a decree

of a civil court. Even otherwise, the jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of

India cannot be ruled out, being one among the basic features of the Constitution of India.

Therefore, the criticism that the award of PLA cannot be called in question in a higher

forum has no force. Moreover, PLA is a machinery to settle or decide disputes relating to

public utility services. In the changing economic scenario, the establishments rendering

public utility services, enumerated in the Act might be run by corporate sectors. Common

people may have claims against these corporates. If they are given a speedy and

inexpensive remedy to resolve their grievances, it should be welcomed of course, as

already mentioned, the party other than the claimant also can raise the dispute before PLA

and it is likely that PLA may render a decision, if no settlement is arrived at, in spite of the

existence of elements of settlement. Thus an award may come against a person who really

did not desire to avail of this remedy in respect of his claims. In such circumstances, he

can either resort to an appeal, or at any rate, to proceedings under Article 226 of the

Constitution of India. It cannot be argued that the members of PLA will be biased in their

decision and that they may even defeat the decision of the Chairman by forming a

majority on extraneous considerations. Even if it happens so in a rare situation, certainly it

can be corrected either in a proceeding under Article 226 of the Constitution of India or in

291
an appeal as mentioned above.

QQ

In Punjab National Bank v. Lakshmichand Rai the High Court held that "The

provisions of the Act shall prevail in the matter of filing an appeal and an appeal would

not lie under the provisions of Section 96 C.P.C. Lok Adalat is conducted under an

independent enactment and once the award is made by Lok Adalat the right of appeal shall

be governed by the provisions of the Legal Services Authorities Act when it has been

specifically barred under Provisions of Section 21(2), no appeal can be filed against the

award under Section 96 C.P.C." The Court further stated that "it may incidentally be

further seen that even the Code of Civil Procedure does not provide for an appeal under

Section 96 against a consent decree. The Code of Civil Procedure also intends that once a

consent decree is passed by Civil Court finality is attached to it. Such finality cannot be

permitted to be destroyed, particularly under the Legal Services Authorities Act, as it

would amount to defeat the very aim and object of the Act with which it has been enacted,

hence, we hold that the appeal filed is not maintainable.

The High Court of Andhra Pradesh held that, in Board of Trustees of the Port of

Visakhapatnam v. Presiding Officer, Permanent, Lok Adalat-Cum Secretary 89' The award

is enforceable as a decree and it is final. The endeavour is only to see that the disputes are

narrowed down and make the final settlement so that the parties are not again driven to

further litigation or any dispute. Though the award of a Lok Adalat is not a result of a

contest on merits just as a regular suit by a Court on a regular trial, however, it is as equal

and on par with a decree on compromise and will have the same binding effect and

88 2000INDLAW MP 201, AIR 2000 MP 301


89 District Legal Service Authority, Visakhapantum, 2000 (5) ALD 682; also refer to Raja Sri Sailendra Narayan
Bhanja, Deo vs State o/Orissia, 1956 INDLAW SC, 15 AIR 1956 SC 346
292
conclusive just as the decree passed on the compromises cannot be challenged in a regular

appeal.

"The truth is, a judgment by consent is intended to put a stop to litigation

between the parties just as much as is a judgment which results from the

decision of the Court after the matter has been fought out to the end. And I think

it would be very mischievous if one were not to give a fair and reasonable

interpretation to such judgments, and were to allow questions that were really

involved in the action to be fought over again in a subsequent action. ”

The likelihood of such events cannot be ruled out. In Mansukhlal Vithaldas

Chauhan v. State of Gujarat,90 it was held that; the duty of the Court is to confine itself to

the question of legality. Its concern should be, (i) whether the decision-making authority

exceeded its powers?; (ii) committed an error of law; (iii) committed a breach of the rules

of natural justice; (iv) reached a decision which no reasonable Tribunal would have

reached; or (v) abused its powers. In the case on hand the Lok Adalat exceeded its powers,

committed an error of law, committed breach of the rules of natural justice and abused its

powers. Even if this Court were to strictly confine itself to the question of legality, the

impugned order cannot still be tolerated as it suffers from all the foibles that justify

interference under Article 226 of the Constitution.

The Karnataka State Bar Council was opposed to the section in the Act which said

if one party approached the permanent Lok Adalat, the other party had no option but to

90 1997IIDLAW SC 1311, (1997) 7. S.C.C. 622.

293
scope of services. As it is, most of the subjects of Public Utility Services are entertained

by the Consumer Redressal Forum. Therefore instead of going in for Permanent Lok

Adalat, consumer forum could be strengthened for speedy disposal of cases.

9.9.2 Persons so Appointed will not have Legal Background: Under the present

circumstance, the specialised tribunals are recruited with the representatives of social

organisations or experts. In the case of machineries set up to try disputes raised by

consumers, members other than Chairman are persons without legal background. Even in

administrative tribunals, persons without legal background, but only with administrative

experience are recruited as members. In addition with persons with judicial background

experts or experienced persons without legal background are also recruited in other

alternative dispute redressal forums.

9.9.3 No Definite Qualifications for the Other Members of PLA: There shall be some

definite and requisite qualifications for the other members of PLA. Of course what is

required is that they shall have "adequate experience in the public utility service". This is

phraseology is too vague. It is invariably proper to spell out definite qualifications, so that

the litigants will have repose confidence that the persons deciding their disputes are

sufficiently qualified and able and he will get quality output, (i.e., decision).

9.10 Period of Limitation: Earlier to this it is pointed out, it is possible, if some person

raises a claim against public utility services and the latter can initiate that dispute before

PLA may take necessary time to submit a decision. In case no compromise is arrived at,

and if the case involves no element of settlement what will happen, if during that time the

period of limitation is over, so far as the claimant party is concerned can it be taken that he

295
has been "prosecuting with due diligence in civil proceedings" in a court. Since, so far as

PLA is concerned, he was not the party initiating the dispute. The Lok Adalat is not

treated as a court, but only vested with certain powers of a civil court or shall be deemed

to be a civil court for the purpose of Section 195 and Chapter XXVI of the Code of

Criminal Procedure, 1973. These aspects require careful scrutiny and consideration.

Lawyers can very well apprise the client of the demerits, if any, of the machinery

of PLA. In spite of that, if the party is inclined to resort to the cheaper remedy, it cannot be

said that the legislation is anti-litigant, as there is no compulsion that one shall first

approach PLA before approaching a court of law.

296

You might also like