Mrs. Aparna W/O. Dinesh Muraiyya vs Sanjay S/O. Premlal Muraiyya And ...
2018 Latest Caselaw 1029 Bom

                                               1




        IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY,

                         NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR



Criminal Writ Petition No. 1061  of 2017

 

Petitioner :              Mrs Aparna w/o Dinesh Muraiyya, aged about 38
                         years,  resident of 19, Pardhi Layout, Mendhekar
`                        Hospital Road, Tajeshwar Nagar, Hudkeshwar, 
                         Nagpur

                          Versus

Respondents:             1.  Sanjay son of Premlal Muraiyya, aged about

44 years, Occ: Service

2. Mrs Meena w/o Sanjay Muraiyya, aged about 40 years, Occ: Housewife

3. Mrs Vimal Premlal Muraiyya, aged about 69 years, Occ: Household

All residents of 19, Pardhi Layot, Mendhekar Hospital Road, Tajeshwar Nagar, Hudkeshwar, Nagpur-34

Shri S. O. Ahmed, Advocate for petitioner Shri D. S. Patrikar, Advocate for respondents no. 1 to 3

Coram : S. B. Shukre, J

Dated : 25th January 2018

Oral Judgment

1. Heard. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith by consent of

parties.

2. On going through the order passed by the Lok Adalat and

copy of roznama, both forming part of record of the petition, I am

convinced that there is great substance in the petition and no merit in the

submission made on behalf of the respondents. Both, roznama as well as

the award passed by the Lok Adalat clearly show that this petitioner was

neither served with any notice nor taken into confidence for recording the

compromise between the parties nor petitioner's consent was secured

before recording the alleged settlement. One does not understand that

when there were two appellants viz. Vimal and Aparna, as to how the Lok

Adalat could have recorded a finding that parties have amicably settled

the matter and passed Award on such a wrong presumption. In any case,

patent illegality has been committed by the Lok Adalat by denying

opportunity of hearing to one of the respondents/present petitioner and,

therefore, the Award passed by the Lok Adalat cannot sustain the scrutiny

of law.

3. The Award passed by the Lok Adalat dated 12.4.2014 is

hereby quashed and set aside. The matter is remitted back to the

appellate court with a direction that it shall decide Criminal Appeal No.

33 of 2014 afresh in accordance with law after giving reasonable

opportunity of hearing to both sides. Parties to appear before the

appellate court on 12th February 2018. The matter shall be disposed of

within two weeks after the parties put in their appearance before the 1 st

appellate court. The appellate court shall also be at liberty to pass a

direction regarding maintenance of status quo with effect from any such

date as it may find suitable, in its discretion.

Rule is made absolute in the above terms. No costs.

S. B. SHUKRE, J

joshi