Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Kishore Baldev Bajaj, filed a writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India seeking to quash a decree dated 25/6/2022 passed by the Megha Lok Adalat in O.S.No.101/2021 on the file of the II Additional Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Dharwad, and to restore the suit. The petitioner was the plaintiff in the original suit, which was a property dispute. The respondents included the defendants in the suit. The petitioner contended that the decree was passed without his consent and that he was not a party to any compromise. The respondents argued that the petitioner had signed the compromise and was bound by it. The High Court examined the records and found that the suit was not referred to the Lok Adalat under Section 20 of the Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987, and that the petitioner had not signed any compromise. The court held that the Lok Adalat acted without jurisdiction and that the decree was a nullity. Consequently, the court quashed the decree and restored the suit to the file of the trial court for fresh disposal in accordance with law.
Headnote
A) Civil Procedure - Lok Adalat Decree - Jurisdiction - Section 20 Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987 - Decree passed by Megha Lok Adalat in O.S.No.101/2021 quashed as the petitioner was not a party to the compromise and the suit was not referred to Lok Adalat under Section 20 of the Act - Held that the Lok Adalat acted without jurisdiction and the decree is a nullity (Paras 1-10).
Issue of Consideration
Whether a decree passed by a Megha Lok Adalat in a suit where the petitioner was not a party to the compromise and the dispute was not referred to Lok Adalat under Section 20 of the Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987, is liable to be quashed.
Final Decision
The writ petition is allowed. The decree dated 25/6/2022 passed in Megha Lok Adalat in O.S.No.101/2021 is quashed. The suit in O.S.No.101/2021 is restored to the file of the II Additional Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Dharwad, for fresh disposal in accordance with law.
Law Points
- Lok Adalat jurisdiction
- compromise decree without party consent
- writ of certiorari
- Legal Services Authorities Act
- 1987 Section 20
- inherent lack of jurisdiction
- nullity of decree
Case Details
2024 LawText (KAR) (08) 45
WP No. 103856 of 2024 (GM-RES)
V.M. Sheelvant for petitioner; Vishwanath Hegde for R1, R5, R6; Sourabh Hegde for R2, R3; A.P. Hegde for R7
Kishore S/o. Baldev Bajaj
Basawaraj S/o. Namasayya Ramaswami Hiremath and Others
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India challenging a decree passed by Megha Lok Adalat in a civil suit.
Remedy Sought
Quashing of the decree dated 25/6/2022 passed in Megha Lok Adalat in O.S.No.101/2021 and restoration of the suit.
Filing Reason
The petitioner claimed that the decree was passed without his consent and without jurisdiction as the suit was not referred to Lok Adalat under Section 20 of the Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987.
Previous Decisions
The Megha Lok Adalat passed a decree on 25/6/2022 in O.S.No.101/2021.
Issues
Whether the Megha Lok Adalat had jurisdiction to pass the decree when the suit was not referred under Section 20 of the Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987?
Whether the petitioner was a party to the compromise on the basis of which the decree was passed?
Submissions/Arguments
Petitioner argued that he never signed any compromise and the decree was passed without his consent, and the Lok Adalat lacked jurisdiction.
Respondents argued that the petitioner had signed the compromise and was bound by the decree.
Ratio Decidendi
A Lok Adalat cannot pass a decree without jurisdiction. If a suit is not referred to Lok Adalat under Section 20 of the Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987, and a party is not a consenting party to the compromise, the decree is a nullity and liable to be quashed.
Judgment Excerpts
The decree passed by the Megha Lok Adalat is without jurisdiction and is a nullity.
The petitioner was not a party to the compromise and the suit was not referred to Lok Adalat under Section 20 of the Act.
Procedural History
The petitioner filed O.S.No.101/2021 before the II Additional Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Dharwad. The suit was allegedly taken up by Megha Lok Adalat and a decree was passed on 25/6/2022. The petitioner filed the present writ petition on 14.08.2024, which was reserved for orders and pronounced on 23.08.2024.
Acts & Sections
- Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987: Section 20
- Constitution of India: Articles 226, 227
