United India Insurance Company Ltd. vs Smt. Madhu Ben and Others

Satish K. Agnohotri, J.—The petitioner, seeks to challenge the award dated 04.03.2008 (Annexure P-5) passed on the basis of compromise between the parties on the ground that the same was result of bona fide mistake, as one more application was pending consideration and the same could not be pointed out at the time of compromise entered between the parties. The basis of award in Lok Adalat is compromise/agreement between the parties. There is no grievance or complaint that the award was obtained either on the basis of misleading of facts or on the basis of non-submission of the consent by the parties. The petitioner herein i.e. Union India Insurance Company Limited was a party before the Lok Adalat also, which was settled by way of award. Thus, this petition cannot be entertained on the basis of bona fide believe, when there is no allegation of any misconduct or error or irregularity in the procedure.

The petitioner has approached the Division Bench in M.C.C. (Pr) No. 11893/2006, wherein, liberty was granted to the petitioner to avail other remedies including filing of writ petition.

So far as, maintainability of writ petition is concerned, the writ petition against an award passed on the basis of compromise before the Lok Adalat, cannot be questioned, unless there is a complaint of misconduct, procedural irregularities and error apparent on the records.

The Supreme Court in State of Punjab and Another Vs. Jalour Singh and Others, , observed as under:

It is true that where an award is made by the Lok Adalat in terms of a settlement arrived at between the parties (which is duly signed by parties and annexed to the award of the Lok Adalat), it becomes final and binding on the parties to the settlement and becomes executable as if it is a decree of a civil court, and no appeal lies against it to any court. If any party wants to challenge such an award based on settlement, it can be done only by filing a petition under Article 226 end/or Article 227 of the Constitution, that too on very limited grounds. But where no compromise or settlement is singed by the parties and the order of the Lok Adalat does not refer to any settlement but directs the respondent to either make payment if it agrees to the order, or approach the High Court for disposal of appeal on merits, if it does not agree, is not an award of the Lok Adalat. The question of challenging such an order in a petition under Article 227 does not arise. As already noticed, in such a situation, the High Court ought to have heard and disposed of the appeal on merits.

As laid down by the Supreme Court in State of Punjab & Another v. Jalour Singh & Others (supra), the petitioner is not aggrieved by the fact that the petitioner has not consented to compromise or the award was passed on the basis of compromise which was not duly signed by the parties. Thus no ground is available to invoke jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. For the reasons mentioned hereinabove, the writ petition is dismissed.