https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=438481 The court set aside orders passed by the Metropolitan Magistrate allowing the respondent to cross-examine the complainant, emphasizing the need for a proper trial. It held that Lok Adalat awards are final and binding, citing relevant case law. The respondent's challenge to the Lok Adalat award on grounds of fraud was dismissed due to a prior settlement agreement. The court found the delay in filing the application under Section 145(2) of the Negotiable Instruments Act improper, concluding that the trial court erred in allowing the applications after settlement at Lok Adalat. The petitions were allowed, and the impugned orders were set aside. en-us Mon, 29 May 2023 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 01 Jun 2023 10:02:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=438481 The court set aside orders passed by the Metropolitan Magistrate allowing the respondent to cross-examine the complainant, emphasizing the need for a proper trial. It held that Lok Adalat awards are final and binding, citing relevant case law. The respondent's challenge to the Lok Adalat award on grounds of fraud was dismissed due to a prior settlement agreement. The court found the delay in filing the application under Section 145(2) of the Negotiable Instruments Act improper, concluding that the trial court erred in allowing the applications after settlement at Lok Adalat. The petitions were allowed, and the impugned orders were set aside. Case-Laws Indian Laws Mon, 29 May 2023 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=438481