Research › Search › Judgment

Patna High Court · body

2013 DIGILAW 995 (PAT)

Kashi Nath Pandey v. State Of Bihar

2013-08-14

AJAY KUMAR TRIPATHI

body2013
ORDER This is yet another matter arising out of the order of so-called Permanent Lok Adalat, Rohtas, which is under challenge. When the writ application was filed, an order dated 12.2.2004 passed by the Lok Adalat in Case No.309 (O)/ 2003 was subject of challenge. By virtue of this order an objection petition filed by the petitioner against maintainability of such proceeding before the Lok Adalat, as the proceeding was alleged to be a sham to obtain a partition of ‘family property’ belonging to others. The objection was rejected. While the writ application was pending, the Lok Adalat has finally passed an order contained in Annexure- 10, dated 14.10.2004 on the ground that since the petitioner had failed to beget any kind of order or stay from the High Court, therefore, he will not wait and disposed of the matter. By an Interlocutory Application, even Annexure- 10 is under challenge. 2. It is evident from perusal of the writ application that it is a prolonged family battle going on over the property and shares thereto amongst the family members. There was even a Title Suit and a First Appeal arising there from, which was fought and they attained some kind of finality. However, to overcome certain difficulties faced by the decisions of the civil court, the private respondents no.3 to 5 connived with each other. Respondent no.3 is the father of respondents no.4 and 5. They directly moved the Permanent Lok Adalat, Rohtas with an application for effecting partition on the basis of compromise arrived at between them. A very detailed objection giving the history of the litigation between the parties was filed by the petitioner, which was very casually brushed aside, obviously with the object of ensuring that the Permanent Lok Adalat does not lack jurisdiction on an issue brought before it, despite the Permanent Lok Adalat having no jurisdiction over such matters especially on an application directly filed before the Permanent Lok Adalat and not on the basis of any reference. 3. Counsel for the petitioner is correct in pointing out that the issue raised by the Permanent Lok Adalat does not come within the ambit of Section 22A as the issue does not relate to any of the matters which have been provided for in the said Section. 3. Counsel for the petitioner is correct in pointing out that the issue raised by the Permanent Lok Adalat does not come within the ambit of Section 22A as the issue does not relate to any of the matters which have been provided for in the said Section. Even if for alternative argument’s sake, Section 22C could be pressed into service but even there is also certain inherent difficulty especially when there was matter of right, title and interest etc. to be decided, which has not even been taken into consideration in the final order contained in Annexure- 10. 4. The Permanent Lok Adalat are being used by all kinds of dishonest litigants to obtain fraudulent and illegal kind of awards, by keeping the interest of the others at bay. This is being done as an award passed by such forum cannot be assailed. 5. The law on the issue is well established by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of State of Punjab & another v. Jalour Singh & others, reported in AIR 2008 SC 1209 and in the case of United India Insurance Co. Limited v. Ajay Sinha & another, reported in AIR 2008 SC 2398 as well as a Bench of this Court in the case of Divisional Manager, National Insurance Co. Limited v. State of Bihar & others, which is CWJC No.9222 of 2009. If an order of such kind is passed which is beyond jurisdiction and that too has been obtained by suppression and misrepresentation merely because two parties agree and file an application on the basis of compromise to over come certain difficulty, the award becomes vulnerable and is assailable. 6. Writ application is allowed. Annexure- 10, which is the final order, dated 14.10.2004 in Case No.309 (O)/ 2003, stands quashed. 7. In view of quashing of Annexure- 10, earlier order passed by the Lok Adalat dated 12.2.2004 has lost its meaning. Parties are free to get their matter adjudicated before an appropriate forum, minus the Lok Adalat.