JUDGMENT 1. - At the outset, the learned counsel appearing for the respondent no.1 in caveat, while seeking to support the impugned award made by Permanent Lok Adalat, Jodhpur has raised an objection that this writ petition is not maintainable. 2. The learned counsel for the respondent No.1 submits that though for the proceedings under Chapter-VI of the Legal Services Authority Act, 1987 ('the Act') no appeal lies to any Court against the award of Lok Adalat per subsection (2) of Section 21 but then, the present one had been the proceedings under Chapter VIA of the Act; and no such bar having been spelt out in relation to the award of Permanent Lok Adalat, the petitioner ought to have taken recourse to the appropriate remedy against the award impugned. 3. The objection raised on behalf of the respondent does not carry even a technical value what to say of substance. Per Sub-section (1) of Section 22E of the Act, the award made by the Permanent Lok Adalat is final and binding on the parties; and, again, per Sub-Section (4) of Section 22E ibid, the award of Permanent Lok Adalat is final and is not open to be questioned in any original suit, application or execution proceedings. No other statutory provision has been pointed out whereby such award of Permanent Lok Adalat could be challenged in appeal or revision or the like. Looking to the scheme of Chapter VIA of the Act and the nature of award impugned, the petitioner cannot be faulted in seeking to assail the same by way of this writ petition. The objection cannot sustain itself and stands rejected. 4. Heard the learned counsel on admission and on the prayer for interim relief. 5. The matter does require consideration. Hence, admit. 6. The contesting respondent is represented and the service on the proforma respondent No.2 is dispensed with. 7. So far the prayer for interim relief is concerned, after having heard the learned counsel for the parties and having perused the material on record, this Court is not persuaded to grant interim relief in relation to the impugned award dated 22.10.2010 (Annex.4) whereby the Permanent Lok Adalat has directed the petitioner-insurer to make payment of an amount of Rs. 9,80,000/- to the claimant for the loss caused due to the fire incident in its factory premises. 8. 9,80,000/- to the claimant for the loss caused due to the fire incident in its factory premises. 8. Essentially, the award as made by the Permanent Lok Adalat is in the nature of a money decree; and the Permanent Lok Adalat has taken care to award interest only at the rate of 6% per annum and only on the amount of Rs. 7,79,960/- for the reason of the petitioner having earlier offered an amount of Rs. 2,00,040/- to the claimant. Having regard to the totality of circumstances, neither the balance of convenience is in favour of the petitioner nor the petitioner would suffer irreparable injury by making payment of the award amount. Thus, there appears no reason to grant any interim relief to the petitioner so as to deprive the claimant of the award amount. 9. However, in the interest of justice, it is directed that if the petitioner deposits the amount payable under the award in question within 30 days from today with the Permanent Lok Adalat, the same shall be paid to the claimant on his furnishing a solvent security for restitution, in case so required at the time of final decision of this writ petition. 10. Subject to the observations aforesaid, the stay application (No.127/2011) stands rejected.Petition Dismissed. *******