Social Icons

Tuesday, August 4, 2015


In this case, the petitioner/plaintiffs assailing the impugned award contents that the plaintiffs have not affixed their signatures to the compromise; award/decree is passed on the basis of a compromise signed by their Counsel. The same is patently illegal and therefore, requires to be set aside. It is on the basis of the signature of their Advocate, compromise is recorded and an award/decree is passed which is patently illegal and therefore, he submits the impugned award requires to be set aside.

As could be seen from the compromise, acting on the family agreement and partition deed under which the properties of the joint family are partitioned by metes and bounds, an attempt is made to convey properties which had fallen to their respective shares in favour of others, probably, to make adjustments. The plaintiffs have not agreed to the said compromise and as is clear from the facts, they have not affixed the signatures to the compromise. This goes to show that the very purpose of referring the matter to Lok Adalath and conducting Lok Adalath is defeated. In the Lok Adalath, the parties have to come face to face, sit together and resolve the dispute with the assistance of the Counsel and the members of the Lok Adalath. If the parties are not coming together, the Advocates for the parties cannot force compromise upon them and the Lok Adalath cannot accept such compromise.

The Hon’ble High Court of Karnataka allowed the writ petition and the order passed by the Lok Adalath was set aside. The original suit was restored to its file.  [Sri. Govardhana and Another Vs. Appi and Others]

Prepared by: S. Hemanth