Lok Adalat Award Final & Binding: Objections Dismissed, Emphasizes Execution Application

The High Court held that the Lok Adalat award, having the force of a decree under the Legal Services Authorities Act, was final and binding on the parties. The Petitioners' objections regarding jurisdiction and court fees were dismissed as the compromise was within the legal framework. The Court emphasized that once parties settle in Lok Adalat, the award is not appealable, and non-compliance necessitates an execution application. The Court dismissed the Petition, emphasizing that the Lok Adalat award was executable under the Civil Procedure Code, despite jurisdictional limitations of the Civil Judge, Junior Division.

---

---

Issues Involved:
The issues involved in this case are the challenge to two interlocutory orders below Exhibit Nos. 15 and 24 in Regular Darkhast No.17 of 2006 pending before the Civil Judge, Junior Division, Akkalkot, District Solapur.

Facts of the Case:
The Respondent filed a Criminal Complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act against the Petitioners, who allegedly borrowed money and issued a cheque that was dishonored. The case was transferred to Lok Adalat and compromised for a reduced amount. The Petitioners failed to comply with the award, leading to the Darkhast proceeding for execution.

Judgment Details:
The High Court held that the Lok Adalat award, having the force of a decree under the Legal Services Authorities Act, was final and binding on the parties. The Petitioners' objections regarding jurisdiction and court fees were dismissed as the compromise was within the legal framework. The Court emphasized that once parties settle in Lok Adalat, the award is not appealable, and non-compliance necessitates an execution application.

Legal Analysis:
The Court cited Section 20 of the Act, empowering Lok Adalats to take cognizance when parties agree to compromise, and Section 21 deeming every award as a decree of the Civil Court. The judgment highlighted that objections to execution based on statutory provisions were rightly rejected, and parties cannot retract from a settled award. The Court emphasized that the award's finality binds all parties, and non-payment post-settlement is untenable.

Conclusion:
The Court dismissed the Petition, emphasizing that the Lok Adalat award was executable under the Civil Procedure Code, despite jurisdictional limitations of the Civil Judge, Junior Division. The judgment underscored that upholding the settlement's integrity was crucial, and the Petitioners benefited from the compromise but failed to fulfill their obligation.

---