ESTATE OFFICER versus COLONEL H.V. MANKOTIA (RETIRED)

Citation: [2021] 8 S.C.R. 728 · Decided: 07-10-2021 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: M.R. SHAH · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case
Judgment (excerpt)

A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
728
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2021] 8 S.C.R.
[2021] 8 S.C.R. 728
728
ESTATE OFFICER
v.
COLONEL H.V. MANKOTIA (RETIRED)
(Civil Appeal No. 6223 of 2021)
OCTOBER 07, 2021
[M.R. SHAH AND A.S. BOPANNA, JJ.]
Legal Services Authority Act, 1987 – ss.19, 20 – Jurisdiction
of Lok Adalat – Held: Jurisdiction of Lok Adalat is to determine
and to arrive at a compromise or a settlement between the parties to
a dispute – If no compromise/settlement is arrived at, the Lok Adalat
has to return the case to the Court from which the reference was
received for disposal in accordance with law – Lok Adalat has no
jurisdiction at all to decide the matter on merits once it is found that
compromise or settlement could not be arrived at between the parties
– Impugned order passed by the Lok Adalat dismissing the writ
petition filed by appellant on merits is set aside – Matter remanded
to High Court to decide the writ petition on merits and in accordance
with law.
Allowing the appeal, the Court
HELD: 1.1 As per sub-section (5) of Section 19, Legal
Services Authority Act, 1987 a Lok Adalat shall havejurisdiction
to determine and to arrive at a compromise or a settlement
between the parties to a dispute in respect of (i) any case pending
before; or (ii) any matter which is falling within the jurisdiction
of, and is not brought before, any court for which the Lok Adalat
is organised. As per sub-section (1) of Section 20 wherein any
case referred to in clause (i) of sub-section (5) of Section19-(i)(a)
the parties thereof agree; or (i)(b) one of the parties thereof makes
an application to the court, for referring the case to the Lok Adalat
for settlement and if such court is prima facie satisfied that there
are chances of such settlement or (ii) the court is satisfied that
the matter is an appropriate one to be taken cognizance of by the
Lok Adalat, the court shall refer the case to the Lok Adalat. It
further provides that no case shall be referred to the Lok Adalat
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
729
under sub-clause (b) of clause (i) or clause (ii) by such court except
after giving a reasonable opportunity of being heard to the parties.
As per sub-section (3) of Section 20 where any case is referred
to a Lok Adalat under sub-section (1) or where a reference is
made to it under sub-section (2), the Lok Adalat shall proceed to
dispose of thecase or matter and arrive at a compromise or
settlement between theparties. Sub-section (5) of Section 20
further provides that where no award is made by the Lok Adalat
on the ground that no compromise orsettlement could be arrived
at between the parties, the record of thecase shall be returned
by it to the court, from which the reference has been received
under sub-section (1) for disposal in accordance with law. The
jurisdiction of the Lok Adalat would be to determine and to arrive
at a compromise or a settlement between the parties to a dispute
and once the aforesaid settlement / compromise fails and no
compromise or settlement could be arrived at between the parties,
the Lok Adalat has to return the caseto the Court from which the
reference has been received for disposal inaccordance with law
and in any case, the Lok Adalat has no jurisdiction at all to decide
the matter on meris once it is found that compromise or
settlement could not be arrived at between the parties. [Paras
6.1, 6.2 and 7][733-G-H ; 734-A-F]
State of Punjab and Ors. v. Ganpat Raj (2006) 8 SCC
364 : [2006] 6 Suppl.  SCR 25 – relied on.
Case Law Reference
[2006] 6 Suppl. SCR 25
relied on
Para 8
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal No.6223 of
2021
From the Judgment and Order dated 30.11.2013 of the High Court
of Madhya Pradesh Bench at Indore in Writ Petition No.8074 of 2011.
Vikramjeet Banerjee, ASG, Arvind Kumar Sharma, Advs. for the
Appellant.
Vikrant Singh Bais, Yogesh Tiwari, Advs. for the Respondent.
ESTATE OFFICER v. COLONEL H.V. MANKOTIA (RETIRED)
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
730
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2021] 8 S.C.R.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by
M. R. SHAH, J.
1. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned order dated
30.11.2013 passed by the High Court of Madhya Pradesh, Bench at
Indore in Writ Petition No. 8074 of 2011 by which in a Lok Adalat held
on 30.11.2013, the members of the Lok Adalat has entered into the merits
of the writ petition and has dismissed the said writ petition preferred by
the appellant on merits, the original writ petitioner has preferred the
present appeal.
2. That the appellant herein filed a wri
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.