Darla Anand Babu vs The Lok Adalat Bench At Rajampet
2021 Latest Caselaw 3074 AP

                    HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C. PRAVEEN KUMAR
                                     AND
                    HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE B. KRISHNA MOHAN

                        WRIT PETITION NO.15551 of 2021


ORDER: (Per Hon'ble Sri Justice B. Krishna Mohan)

      This Writ Petition is filed to set aside the award passed by the

1st respondent in LAC No.316 of 2017 of Mandal Services Committee,

Rajampet in Criminal Appeal No.106 of 2017 on the file of

III Additional Sessions Judge, Rajampet dated 16.12.2017 on the ground

that the terms of the award are civil in nature conferring civil rights

between the parties appeared before the 1st respondent as violative of

the Legal Services Authorities Act.

2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned

standing counsel for the 1st respondent.

3. The facts of the case are that the 2nd respondent filed a private

complaint against the respondents No.3 to 11 and the petitioner herein

who was figured as Accused No.3 in C.C.No.269 of 2016 on the file of

Judicial Magistrate of First Class at Railway, Kodur for the alleged

offences punishable under Sections 323, 341, 427, 448 and 506 IPC r/w

149 IPC. The trial Court discharged the petitioner herein and the

respondents No.3 to 11 under Section 245 Cr.P.C. vide its order dated

07.03.2017. Questioning the same the 2nd respondent herein filed the

Criminal Appeal No.106 of 2017 on the file of III Additional Sessions Judge,

Rajampet. During the pendency of the said appeal the matter was

referred to Lok Adalath and the same was compromised between the

respondents No.2 to 9 and 11 herein, except the petitioner and the 10th

respondent herein who did not agree for such compromise. Consequently,

the impugned award was passed by the 1st respondent herein on

16.12.2017 acquitting all the accused who participated in the said

compromise confirming the Judgment of the trial Court dated 07.03.2017.

Subsequently, the Criminal Appeal No.106 of 2017 on the file of

III Additional Sessions Judge, Rajampet was also dismissed as against the

petitioner herein and the 10th respondent. Now that the petitioner herein

who is not a party to the impugned Lok Adalat Award as he did not agree

to the terms of compromise questions the said Lok Adalat Award dated

16.12.2017 curiously on the ground that the terms of the award appears

to be civil in nature determining the civil rights of the parties appeared

before 1st respondent which may offend his civil rights also as he was not

a party to it.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the un-official

respondents who are parties to the impugned award are trying to

interfere with the rights of the petitioner herein and they are not

allowing him to enter into the church for prayers and as such he seeks to

set aside the impugned award. Though, he is not a party to the said

award the interested unofficial respondents are trying to interfere with

his rights under the guise of the said award.

5. On the other hand, the learned standing counsel for the

1st respondent submits that admittedly the petitioner is not a party to the

impugned Lok Adalat award passed by the 1st respondent herein and as

such he cannot challenge the same on any ground much less if it is

interfering with his civil rights. The learned counsel further submits that

the writ petition is liable to be dismissed in limini as the petitioner has

not made out any case for indulgence of this Hon'ble Court.

6. Having regard to the above said facts and circumstances and on

perusal of the impugned award dated 16.12.2017, it is clear that the

petitioner herein though a party to the proceedings but did not agree to

the terms of the compromise. Hence the Lok Adalat held that case against

A3 and A9 will be proceeded in the regular court. It is now said that the

appeal filed in regular Court against the order of discharge is also

dismissed. Therefore, if at all any of his civil rights are affected by virtue

of the action of the any of the un-official respondents herein, it is open

for him to work out his remedies under common law in spite of existence

of the impugned award dated 16.12.2017 as it is not binding on him.

7. For the above said reasons, this Court is not inclined to interfere

with the Lok Adalat award of the 1st respondent dated 16.12.2017.

8. In the result, the Writ Petition is dismissed. No costs. As a sequel

thereto, miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in the Writ Petition shall

stand closed.

_______________________ JUSTICE C. PRAVEEN KUMAR

______________________ JUSTICE B. KRISHNA MOHAN 17-08-2021 Yvk