Mandal Satyanarayana vs Ranga Reddy Legal Services Authority
2024 Latest Caselaw 3900 Tel

Telangana High Court

Mandal Satyanarayana vs Ranga Reddy Legal Services Authority on 24 September, 2024

Author: P.Sam Koshy

Bench: P.Sam Koshy

   THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P.SAM KOSHY
                     AND
 THE HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR JUKANTI
                      W.P.No.26090 OF 2024

ORDER:

(per Hon'ble Sri Justice P.Sam Koshy)

Heard Mr. Vadlakonda Ravi Kumar Reddy, learned counsel

for the petitioner, Mr. Pusluri Shashi Kiran, learned Standing

Counsel for respondent No.1/TSLSA and Mr. H. Venugopal,

learned Senior Counsel representing Mr. P. Ammi Reddy, learned

counsel for respondent No.2. Perused the record.

2. Challenge to the present petition is to the Award passed by

the Lok Adalat on 21.01.2019 in Lok Adalat Case No.1 of 2019 in

O.S.No.l225 of 2018.

3. The original suit was a suit for partition where the petitioner

was third defendant. Pending the suit before the trial Court, the

matter, with the consent of all the parties, stood referred to the Lok

Adalat and the Lok Adalat Award was passed on 21.01.2019.

There has been no challenge to the said Lok Adalat Award till

now and by efflux of time, the said Award has attained finality.

The Award was passed in the presence and with the consent of all

the parties to the suit. Subsequently, there appears to be some

difficulty that arose in the party in the course of the execution of

the compromise decree and the matter travelled to the High Court

by way of a Civil Miscellaneous Appeal i.e., C.M.A.No.393 of

2022. The said CMA stood allowed vide judgment dated

02.09.2022. In the course of allowing the said CMA, there appears

to be certain observations so far as the compromise Award dated

21.01.2019 attaining finality which perhaps now is coming as a

hindrance to the petitioner herein, the defendant No.3 in the

original suit.

4. Given the grievance of the petitioner, we are of the

considered opinion that the petitioner seems to be more aggrieved

by the observation made by the Division Bench of this Court in

C.M.A.No.393 of 2022, decided on 02.09.2022 and filing of a writ

petition to clarify that observation would not be a proper remedy

available to the petitioner nor can the petitioner now be permitted

to turn around and challenge the original Award itself which was

disposed of on 21.01.2019 by the Lok Adalat, as the petitioner had

entered appearance before the Lok Adalat and had accepted the

terms and conditions of the compromise and also put his signatures

on the compromise decree with wide open eyes and, therefore,

he cannot now be permitted to cry foul on the Award so passed.

5. The writ petition, therefore, fails and is accordingly rejected.

None the less, the rights of the petitioner to avail appropriate

available legal remedies stand reserved. There shall be no order as

to costs.

Consequently, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall

stand closed.

__________________ P.SAM KOSHY, J

___________________________ ANIL KUMAR JUKANTI, J 24.09.2024 Lrkm