JUDGMENT : A. BADHARUDEEN, J. 1. The petitioners, who got arrayed as judgment debtors 1 and 4 in E.P.No. 63/2016 in A.P.No. 172/2013 on the files of the Munsiff’s Court, Vaikom, have filed this Original Petition (Civil) under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, with prayer to set aside Ext.P2 award and Ext.P7 order passed against them. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned counsel for the 1st respondent. 3. On perusal of Ext.P2 award passed in A.P.No. 172/2013 dated 03.09.2013, the petitioner’s name is shown as ‘Syamala’ and the respondents’ names are shown as ‘Komalavally’, ‘Raji K.Nair’, ‘Rekha K.Nair’ and ‘Ratheesh Kumar K.’ As per Ext.P2, an award passed in favour of Syamala, wherein Raji K Nair and Rekha K Nair alone signed and the petitioners did not sign though their names also shown in the award. 4. The award holder/1st respondent put the same in execution as per E.P.No. 63/2016 and as part of execution proceedings, Ext.P7 order in E.A.No. 171/2017 dated 28.11.2017 was passed by appointing a survey commissioner to measure the property. 5. Now the question poses for consideration are as under: (1) Whether parties named in an award passed in the Lok Adalat and who did not sign the same are bound by the terms of the award? (2) If an award is passed without getting the signatures of the parties in the award, can the award be executed against the non-signatories in the award? 6. On perusal of Ext.P2, it is emphatically clear that though there were four respondents therein, whose names are extracted herein above, only two of them signed in the award and the petitioners herein did not sign the same. The law is well settled that parties named in any award passed in the Lok Adalat or in any settlement and who did not sign the same are not bound by the terms of the award. Therefore, the petitioners, who are non-signatories to Ext.P2, are not bound by Ext.P2. 7. Similarly, no proceeding of execution also liable to be initiated against the petitioners, who are not signatories to the award and no order also to be passed against them or their property in any manner. Therefore, the petitioners, who are non-signatories to Ext.P2, are not bound by Ext.P2. 7. Similarly, no proceeding of execution also liable to be initiated against the petitioners, who are not signatories to the award and no order also to be passed against them or their property in any manner. The legal position is emphatically clear that an award passed without getting the signatures of the parties in the award, the award could not be executed against the non-signatories in the award. Having held so, it is ordered that Ext.P2 award as against the petitioners is non-est though the same would bind the other parties who signed it. It is also found that the execution proceedings initiated against the petitioners also is non-est and therefore, proceedings in E.P.No. 63/2016 as against the petitioners also would not stand. Accordingly, Ext.P7 order is declared as not binding on the petitioners. But the other parties who signed in Ext.P2 are bound by the terms of the award and Ext.P7. Therefore, execution proceedings can go on against them as per law. 8. Holding so, the learned Munsiff is directed to execute the decree against Raji K Nair and Rekha K Nair as per law, confining the same to their properties. 9. This Original Petition (Civil) stands allowed as above. 10. Interim order of stay stands vacated. 11. Registry is directed to forward a copy of this judgment to the Munsiff’s Court, Vaikom, for information and further steps.