TaxTMI Login
AI OCR ✕Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →Just a moment...
AI OCR ✕Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
of 
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether a writ petition was maintainable at the instance of a third party aggrieved by a compromise decree passed by Lok Adalat on the allegation of fraud, and whether the award deserved to be set aside with restoration of the suit.
Analysis: An award passed by Lok Adalat on a settlement is final and binding on the parties to the settlement and is ordinarily challengeable only by a writ petition under Article 226 and/or Article 227 of the Constitution of India on limited grounds. While a third party is generally required to seek redress in a civil suit, a writ petition can lie in exceptional cases where prima facie fraud, misrepresentation, or collusion is shown in obtaining the award. The record showed that the petitioner was a legal heir whose interest was not disclosed in the compromise proceedings, the suit was settled shortly after institution, and the circumstances indicated a prima facie case of suppression and fraud.
Conclusion: The writ petition was maintainable and the compromise award of the Lok Adalat was liable to be quashed, with the suit restored for decision on merits after impleadment of necessary parties.
Final Conclusion: The challenge to the Lok Adalat compromise succeeded on the ground of fraud, and the underlying partition suit was revived for fresh adjudication.
Ratio Decidendi: A third party may invoke writ jurisdiction to challenge a Lok Adalat award obtained by prima facie fraud or collusion, and such an award can be set aside notwithstanding its finality and binding effect under the statutory scheme.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
