LOK ADALATS

The Constitution of India has defined and declared ”to secure to all
the citizens of India , Justice-social, economic and political; liberty;
equality and fraternity” as the common goal for its citizens. The
eternal value of constitutionalism lies in the Rule of Law, which has
three facets : Rule by Law, Rule under Law and Rule according to
Law.
Alternate dispute Resolution(ADR) originated in the USA as an
endeavour to find alternatives to the traditional legal system that
was regarded as adversarial, costly, unpredictable, rigid, over-
professionalized, damaging to relationships, and limited to narrow
rights-based remedies as opposed to creative problem solving. The
American origins of the concept are not surprising, given certain
features of litigation in that system, such as: trials of civil actions by
a jury, lawyers ’contingency fees, lack of application in full of the
rule ” the loser pays the costs”.
Need for Alternative Dispute Resolution
In the legal system as it operates in India, any wrong is regarded as
a matter of course.
The objective of ADR is to check litigation explosion, make the
justice system less expensive and easily accessible to the illiterate
and indigent.The focus is to avoid feuds and develop a harmonious
relationship between the disputing parties by settling the dispute
through process of arbitration, mediation, negotiation and the likes.
The ADR system can never be a complete alternative to the
conventional system of dispute resolution. For example, settling of
criminal disputes can never be done through the ADR mechanism.
There is no substitute for Court decisions in criminal law. Moreover,
it is necessary for both the parties to be genuinely interested in
solving the dispute peacefully.
The Courts of law are confronted with four main problems which are
as follows :
1. i) The number of Courts and judges in all grades is alarmingly
low.
2. ii) Increase in the number of cases owing to the various State
and Central acts
iii) The costs involved in prosecuting or defending a case. The
Court fee, the lawyer’s fee and the incidental charges amounts to
quite a large sum.
iv)The process is very cumbersome and time-consuming because
of the huge number of already pending cases.
Kinds Of ADR
A wide range of dispute prevention and resolution procedures exist
in India that allow the participants to develop a fair, cost-effective,
and private forum to resolve disputes. All ADR mechanisms
available in the country can be broadly discussed at two levels: [v]
1) Those which are applicable throughout the country &
2) Those which are available at the state / UT level to deal with
specific problems arising under their jurisdiction.
The following are models for ADR as prototypes for use in dispute-
redressal exist on national level:
• Tribunals, commissions, boards, etc.
• Lok Adalats
• Nyaya Panchayats
• Arbitration
• Conciliation
• Ombudsman
• Fast Track Courts

TRIBUNALS:
Article 323-B was added to the Constitution to authorize the
legislature to establish tribunal, commissions, district boards, etc.,
for the adjudication or trial of any disputes, complaints or offenses
with respect to any matters.

LOK ADALATS:
Lok Adalat or the People’s Courts, decide the dispute with utmost
expedition to arrive at a compromise or settlement on the basis of
principles of justice, equity, fair play and other legal principles.
When the Lok Adalat is not able to arrive at a compromise or
settlement, the record of the case is returned to the Court, which
initially referred the case to the Lok Adalats. The Lok Adalat is
presided over by a sitting or retired judicial officer as the chairman,
with two other members, usually a lawyer and a social worker.
NYAY PANCHAYATS
In villages, the administration is carried out by a Panchayat headed
by village headman that decides petty civil, criminal and revenue
cases. The respectable members of the village community form the
Panchayat, where for those who prefer it, disputes are resolved by
a process of conciliation and mediation.
ARBITRATION
Settlement of disputes by arbitration has been practiced in India
from the distant past and the legal literature tells us of the ancient
system of arbitration for resolving disputes concerning the family, or
the trade or a social group. The Constitution of India also mandates
it as a Directive Principle of State Policy that the State should
encourage settlement of international disputes by arbitration.
CONCILIATION
There is not a lot of difference between mediation and conciliation.
Mediation is one of the methods by which conciliation is achieved.
Conciliation is essentially a consensual process. Under Part III of
the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, Section 61 to 81 provides
for method of conciliation of disputes arising out of legal
relationship, whether contractual or not.
OMBUDSMAN
In certain informal disputes, a third party ombudsperson is
appointed by the organisation to investigate complaints within the
institution and prevent disputes or facilitate their resolution. The
Ombudsperson may use various ADR mechanisms in the process
of resolving disputes.
The Swedish legislature first created the position of ombudsperson
in the early 1800s; the literal translation of ombudsperson is “an
investigator of citizen complaints.” This official was considered to be
a person of “known legal ability and outstanding integrity” and was
chosen by the Swedish parliament to serve a four-year term.

ORIGIN OF LOK ADALATS

The concept of Lok Adalats originated in India during the British
Rule to curb the voice of the people. Now, however this concept
has been rejuvenated. It has become very popular amongst
litigants. Studies have showed that it is one of the most efficient and
important ADR mechanisms and most suited to the Indian
environment, culture and societal interests. Camps of Lok Adalats
were initially established in Gujarat in March 1982 and now have
been extended throughout the country.
The Lok Adalat originated owing to the failure of the Indian legal
system to provide fast, effective, and affordable justice. The
evolution of this movement was a part of the strategy to relieve the
heavy burden on the Courts with cases pending disposal.
Lok Adalats are a blend of all three forms of traditional ADR:
arbitration, mediation, and conciliation. They use conciliation, with
elements of arbitration given that decisions are typically binding,
and are an illustration of legal decentralization as conflicts are
returned to communities from whence they originated for local
settlement.
CONSTITUTIONAL DIRECTIVES AND
LEGISLATION
The advent of Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987 gave a statutory
status to Lok Adalats, pursuant to the constitutional mandate in
Article 39-A of the Constitution of India. The Legal service
Authorities Act was enacted to constitute legal services authorities
to provide free and competent legal services to the weaker sections
of the society and to organize Lok Adalats to secure that the
operation of the legal system promotes justice on the basis of equal
opportunity. The settlement of disputes by the Panchayats or tribal
heads was prevalent since ancient times. When statutory
recognition was given to Lok Adalat, it was specifically provided that
the award passed by the Lok Adalat will have the force of decree of
a court which can be executed as a civil court decree.
The Act is a legislative attempt to decongest the Courts and to
ensure the decentralization of justice.
Since 1985, Lok Adalats have been exclusively organized for
settlement of motor third party claims, following the initiative of
former Chief Justice of India, Shri. P. N. Bhagwati. The endeavour
received a positive response, since both the claimant as well as the
Insurance Company could derive benefits. The increasing number
of cases in the Motor Accident Claim Tribunal (MACT) and the
backlog of pending cases pressed the insurer and the judicial
system to think about a quick disposal oriented system such as Lok
Adalats/Conciliatory forums. Lok Adalat has become a Dispute
Management Institution. It is an informal system of dispute
resolution, devoid of the procedural wrangles of regular trial. Since
the Legal Services Authorities (Amendment) Act 1994 , the Lok
Adalat settlement is no longer a voluntary concept. By this Act Lok
Adalat has got statutory character and has been legally recognized.
Certain salient features of the Act are enumerated below:-
Section 19– Central, State, District and Taluk Legal Services
Authority has beencreatedwho are responsible for organizing Lok
Adalats at such intervals and place.
Conciliators for Lok Adalat comprise the following: -A sitting or
retired judicial officer. other persons of repute as may be prescribed
by the State Government in consultation with the Chief Justice of
High Court.
Section 20: Cases can be referred for consideration of Lok Adalat
as under:-
By consent of both the parties to the disputes;
One of the parties makes an application for reference;
Where the Court is satisfied that the matter is an appropriate one to
be taken cognizance of by the Lok Adalat;
Compromise settlement shall be guided by the principles of justice,
equity, fair play and other legal principles;
Where no compromise has been arrived at through conciliation, the
matter shall be returned to the concerned court for disposal in
accordance with Law.
ORGANISATION AND STRUCTURE OF
LOK ADALATS
Lok Adalats may be organized at such intervals and places and for
exercising such jurisdiction and for such areas as State Authority or
District Authority or the Supreme Court Legal Services Committee
or every High Court Legal Services Committee or, as the case may
require.
COMPOSITION:
Every Lok Adalat constituted for an area shall consist of such
number of serving or retired judicial officers; and any other
person.[xxii]
JURISDICTION:
Lok Adalat has the jurisdiction to determine and to arrive at a
compromise or settlement between the parties to a dispute in
respect of any case pending before; or any matter which is falling
within the jurisdiction of, and is not brought before, any court for
which the Lok Adalat is organized.
(a)Any case pending before any court
(b)Any case not brought before any court.
Permanent Lok Adalat
In 2002, Parliament brought about certain amendments to the Legal
Services Authorities Act, 1987. The said amendment introduced
Chapter VI-A. According to the amendment, the Central or State
Authorities may establish by notification, Permanent Lok Adalats for
determining issues in connection to Public Utility Services.
Public Utility Services include:
• Transport service,
• Postal, telegraph or telephone services,
• Supply of power, light and water to public,
(4) System of public conservancy or sanitation,
(5) Insurance services and such other services as notified by the
Central or State Governments.
PERMANENT LOK ADALAT’s have the same powers that are
vested on the Lok-Adalats, mentioned under Section 22(1) of the
Act.
PROCEDURE FOLLOWED IN A LOK
ADALAT
The Lok Adalat is usually presided over by a sitting or retired
judicial official as the chairman with two other members, a lawyer
and a social worker. It has been observed through experience that
cases involving monetary disputes are easily settled through Lok
Adalats. Therefore, most motor road accident disputes are brought
to Lok Adalats. The primary condition of the Lok Adalat is that both
parties in dispute should consent to the settlement. It is necessary
that the parties involved in the dispute are whole-heartedly involved
in the justice dispensing system and do abide by the decision given
by the Lok Adalat.
There is no court fee. If the case is already filed in the regular court,
the fee paid will be refunded if the dispute is settled at the Lok
Adalat. The procedural laws and the Evidence Act are not strictly
followed while assessing the merits of the claim presented to the
Lok Adalat. The decision of the court is binding on the parties to the
dispute and its order is capable of execution through legal process.
No appeal lies against the decision of the court.
Lok Adalat is very effective in the settlement of money claims.
Disputes like partition suits, damages and matrimonial cases can
also be easily settled before Lok Adalat as the scope for
compromise through an approach of give and take is high in these
cases. Lok Adalat is indeed a boon to the litigant public, where they
can get their disputes settled fast and free of cost.
CASES SUITED FOR LOK ADALAT
Lok Adalats have the competence to deal with the following
cases[xxvi]:
• Compoundable civil, revenue and criminal cases.
• Motor accident cases
• Partition Claims
• Matrimonial and family disputes
• Bonded Labour disputes
• Land acquisition disputes
• Bank’s unpaid loan cases
• Arrears of retirement benefits cases
• Cases which are not under the jurisdiction of any Court.
POWERS OF THE LOK ADALATS
The Powers bestowed on Lok Adalats are as follows:
1. i) It has the power of the Civil Court, under the Code of Civil
Procedure, 1908, while trying a suit, in respect of the following
matters:-
2. Power to summon and enforce the attendance of any witness
and to examine him/her on oath. b) Power to enforce the
discovery and production of any document.
3. c) Power to receive evidence on affidavits,
4. d) Power for requisitioning of any public record or document or
copy thereof or from any court.
5. e) Such other matters as may be prescribed.
6. ii) Every Lok Adalat shall have the power to specify its own
procedure for the determination of any dispute coming before
it.
iii) All proceedings before a Lok Adalat shall be deemed to be
judicial proceedings within the meaning of Sections 193, 219 and
228 of IPC.
1. iv) Every Lok Adalat shall be deemed to be a Civil Court for the
purpose of Sec 195 and Chapter XXVI of Cr.P.C.
2.
FINALITY OF THE LOK ADALAT AWARD
During the Lok Adalat, the parties agree to abide by the decision of
the judge at the Lok Adalat. However, it has been seen that the
same order is challenged on several grounds. In one of the recent
cases, the Supreme Court of India has once again laid to rest all
such doubts. In unequivocal terms, the Court held that the award of
the Lok Adalat is as good as the decree of the Court. The award
passed by the Lok Adalat is the decision of the Court itself though
arrived at by the simpler method of conciliation instead of the
process of arguments in court.
CONSENT OF PARTIES
The most important factor to be considered while deciding the
cases at the Lok Adalat is the consent of both the parties. It cannot
be forced on any party that the matter has to be decided by the Lok
Adalat. [xxxii] However, once the parties agree that the matter has
to be decided by the Lok Adalat, then any party cannot walk away
from the decision of the Lok Adalat. In several instances, the
Supreme Court has held that if there was no consent, the award of
the Lok Adalat is not executable and also if the parties fail to agree
to get the dispute resolved through Lok Adalat, the regular litigation
process remains open for the contesting parties.
The Supreme Court has also held that compromise is always
bilateral and means mutual adjustment. Settlement is termination of
legal proceedings by mutual consent. If no compromise can be
arrived at, then no order can be passed by the Lok Adalat.
CONCLUSION
The special conditions prevailing in the Indian society require a
highly sensitized legal service which is efficacious for the poor and
the down-trodden. The Lok Adalat mechanism is no more an
experiment in the country, it is in fact, a full-proven success that
needs to increase its domain and bring under its realm the several
aspects that have been excluded till date.
Lok Adalats can be viewed as an instrument to social change as
well. As said by Prof.Menon,”Lok Adalat has the potential for social
reconstruction and legal mobilization for social change. It can
influence the style of administration of justice and the role of the
lawyer and judge in it. It can take law closer to the life of the people
and reduce disparity between law in books and law in action.”[xxxiii]
The need for Lok Adalats is aggravated by the huge population of
India that creates an unmanageable burden on the Judiciary
system.
To increase the efficiency of the system of Lok Adalats, it is crucial
for the public, the lawyers, the executive and the Judiciary to work
in harmony and coordination. The people should be made aware of
the advantages of the Lok Adalats.
The main challenge that lies in the path of the success of Judiciary
is the involvement of the masses.
In the existing situation, the resort to Lok Adalats has enabled
amicable dispute settlement. The success of Lok Adalats should
indeed be measured by the overall atmosphere generated in the
country, not by the number and nature of Lok Adalat held, cases
settled or compensation awarded.