The New India Assurance Co. Ltd. vs Smt. Pavitrabai
2022 Latest Caselaw 3164 MP

                                                                          1
                                           IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT INDORE
                                                                       BEFORE
                                                           HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE ANIL VERMA
                                                                 ON THE 7th OF MARCH, 2022

                                                           MISC. PETITION No. 3839 of 2021

                                              Between:-
                                              THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD. 227 SAKET
                                              NAGAR (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                                                        .....PETITIONER
                                              (BY SHRI SUDHIR DANDWATE, ADVOCATE )

                                              AND

                                     1.       SMT. PAVITRABAI W/O LATE SHRI RITESH
                                              REVATIA , AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS, OCCUPATION:
                                              HOUSEHOLD VILL-JAITPURA (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                     2.       PRATAPSINGH S/O LATE SHRI PUNUMCHAND ,
                                              AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS, VILLAGE JAITPURA, THE
                                              AND DIST. DHAR (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                     3.       PREMSINGH S/O SHRI ANSINGH DAWAR VILLAGE
                                              DALPURA, RAJGARH, TH. SARDARPUR (MADHYA
                                              PRADESH)

                                     4.       KRISHNAKANT S/O SHRI YOGENDRA KUMAR
                                              R AT H O R E WARD 6, ALIRAJPUR, THROUGH
                                              SUMERSINGH S/O MAGANSINGH CHOUHAN, R/O
                                              VIVEKANAND COLONY (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                                                     .....RESPONDENTS
                                              (BY SHRI GOVIND MEENA, ADVOCATE )

                                           This petition coming on for order this day, the court passed the following:
                                                                           ORDER

As jointly prayed, the matter is heard finally. Learned counsel for the respondent submits that he has no objection, the present petition is allowed and the matter is remanded back to the below Tribunal for afresh adjudication.

Present petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India has been filed by the petitioner against the impugned order dated 28/08/2021 passed the Bench of Permanent and Continuous Lok Adalat by which joint request made by both the parties to recall the order dated 28/11/2020 passed in Lok Adalat has been

Signature Not Verified dismissed.

SAN

Digitally signed by AMOL N MAHANAG Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that respondent nos. 1 and 2 Date: 2022.03.09 13:37:48 PST

preferred claim petition before the below Tribunal for compensation and the matter

was placed before the Lok Adalat held on 28/11/2020. The case was settled between the parties for amount of Rs. 8,86,000/- and docket was filed before the Lok Adalat. The Lok Adalat, while accepting the compromise, passed the award dated 28/11/2020 for amount of Rs. 8,86,000/-. While processing the file, it came

to the knowledge of the Insurance Company that the produced permit was not valid at the time of the incident. The fact was was also brought to the notice of counsel for the claimants, therefore, both the parties filed a joint application for recalling the order passed in the Lok Adalat, but the Lok Adalat Bench dismissed the said application by holding it to be decree consented by both the parties and it cannot be set aside as both the parties entered into compromise, Hence, present petition has been filed before this Court.

It is settled position of law that no suit shall lie to set aside a decree on the ground that the compromise, on which the decree is passed, was not lawful. Thus, a regular appeal, a miscellaneous appeal and a separate suit is not maintainable to challenge it, therefore, the only remedy available to an aggrieved person, who wants to challenge compromise decree, is to approach to very same Court, which passed the compromise decree.

In the case of Kasturevva Vs. Jayshree reported in AIR 2015 Kar 190, the High Court relying on the reasons stated in R. Rajanna Vs. S.R. Venkataswammy , held that the plaintiff has to approach the Court that passed the decree on the basis of any such agreement or compromise, it is that Court and that Court alone, who can examine and determine that question and this Court cannot interfere under Articles 226 and 227 of Constitution of India.

In light of the aforesaid judgment, present petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India by the petitioner is hereby dismissed CC as per rules.

(ANIL VERMA) JUDGE amol Signature Not Verified SAN

Digitally signed by AMOL N MAHANAG Date: 2022.03.09 13:37:48 PST