ORDER : 1. The petitioner has called in question the order passed by the Principal Senior Civil Judge, Gokak in Civil Miscellaneous No. 4/2011 filed under Section 151 of CPC, wherein the said Miscellaneous petition came to be rejected. 2. I have heard the arguments of the learned counsel of the petitioner and the counsel for the respondent and carefully perused the entire materials on record. 3. The fact that divulged from the records are that, the plaintiff and the defendant in O.S. No. 92/2006 have entered into a compromise before the Lok Adalath on 22.04.2006 agreeing to compromise the dispute between themselves with reference to the suit schedule properties. Subsequently, the defendant No. 2 found that there was a fraud played upon him to the effect that some of the properties which were the self acquired properties of defendant No. 2 were allotted to some other party to the suit. Therefore, he made an application before the Principal Senior Civil Judge, Gokak who passed the decree on the basis of the compromise petition accepted by the Lok Adalath for correction of the said decree. 4. The learned Senior Civil Judge has rejected the said application mainly on the ground that, it has no jurisdiction to correct the decree or modify the decree or set aside the decree on the basis of the allegations of fraud. It is observed that, the Lok Adalath only has got jurisdiction which passed the order on the basis of the compromise petition filed by the parties. Secondly, the learned Judge has observed that except alleging the fraud, in the affidavit by mechanically using the word ‘fraud’ no other factual matrix have been placed on record to find out what exactly the nature of the fraud played and by whom and in what manner. Therefore, having found that there are no grounds to interfere with the Lok Adalath’s order for want of jurisdiction, the said application came to be rejected, against which order the present writ petition is filed. 5. The learned Senior Civil Judge has rightly came to the conclusion that, he has no jurisdiction to pass any order on the basis of the above said application as the said Court was not the Court which passed the decree, but it is the Lok Adalath an alternative dispute resolution forum which passed the decree. 5. The learned Senior Civil Judge has rightly came to the conclusion that, he has no jurisdiction to pass any order on the basis of the above said application as the said Court was not the Court which passed the decree, but it is the Lok Adalath an alternative dispute resolution forum which passed the decree. Because there was no mechanism for writing the decree the regular court before which the suit was filed are mechanically passing the decree on the basis of the orders passed by the Lok Adalath. Lok Adalath is an independent institution which was vested with the power of recording compromise and passing the decrees. Therefore, once the matter has been referred to the Lok Adalath and compromise has been entered into between the parties the regular Court before which the suit has been filed seizes to have any jurisdiction either to correct the decree or to pass any orders. If at all, the said compromise recorded by the Lok Adalath is against any law for the time being in force or against the public policy or it was the fraudulent transaction entered into between the parties, the said point can be agitated by way of filing a writ petition which has been rightly done by now after exhausting the alleged remedy before the Senior Civil Judge for the parties had no such remedy before the said Court. 6. In the wake of the above said facts as could be seen from the application filed for correction of the said decree under Section 151 of CPC, which is virtually reiterated in this writ petition. There is no material to show that, what exactly the fraud played by the parties to the said suit. There are no allegations against any individual including the counsel who was appearing for the present petitioner. It is not that the petitioner was not assisted by his counsel. The draft has been prepared and the compromise petition has been signed by the petitioner and further the compromise has been accepted before the Lok Adalath. Thereafter considering the due execution of the compromise petition, the Lok Adalath has passed such an order. Unless there is an explanation with reference to the fraud played by any party to the proceedings or the counsel, the mere using of the word ‘fraud’ in the application or in the affidavit would not be sufficient. Thereafter considering the due execution of the compromise petition, the Lok Adalath has passed such an order. Unless there is an explanation with reference to the fraud played by any party to the proceedings or the counsel, the mere using of the word ‘fraud’ in the application or in the affidavit would not be sufficient. Prima-facie at least the factual matrix of the case make out a suspicious circumstance in order to enable the Court to draw an inference that, there might have been some fraud or misrepresentation played in this particular case. Merely showing that there was a misrepresentation or fraud is not sufficient unless they are supported by the surrounding circumstances. In this particular case, it is not that the party was totally illiterate or he was not supported by his counsel. His advocate has also signed the compromise petition and the petitioner has also signed the compromise petition. 7. Therefore, under the above said facts and circumstances, unless some semblance of materials are available, the Court cannot imagine the existence of any fact with reference to the allegation of fraud. Therefore, under the aforesaid circumstances, the petition in my opinion is devoid of merits and the same is liable to be dismissed. 8. Accordingly, the petition is dismissed.