TABLE OF CONTENTS

 Introduction
 Scheme of the Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987
 Authorities under the Act
 Entitlement to legal services
 Provision for finances for implementing Legal Aid Schemes
 Statutory Scheme for Lok Adalat
 Definition of Lok Adalat
 Constitution of Lok Adalat
 Organization of Lok Adalat
 Composition of the Lok Adalat Bench.
 Levels of Lok Adalats
 State Authority Level
 High Court Level
 District Level
 Taluk Level
 National Lok Adalat
 Permanent Lok Adalat
 Mobile Lok Adalats
 Critical Analysis of Permanent Lok Adalats
 Jurisdiction and competency of Lok Adalat
 Scope and Ambit of Lok Adalat
 Review of settlement provisions
 Expeditious disposal of cases
 Cases on the working of legal aid functionaries under the legal services
authority act, 1987.
 Cases relating the working of Lok Adalats and Permanent Lok Adalats.
 Court-fees exemption in Lok Adalat.
 Lok Adalat conferred powers of Civil Courts.
 Status and impact of awards passed by Lok Adalats.
 Procedural formalities.
 Natural Justice and Lok Adalats.
 Conclusion
 Bibliography
 TABLE OF CASES

 Interglobe Aviation v. N. Satchidanand AIR 2011 SC1989

 Life Insurance Corporation v. Suresh Kumar (2011)7 SCC491
 Bar Council of India v. Union of India (2012) 8 SCC 243
 S.N. Pandey v. Union of India (2012) 8 SCC 261
 New India Assurance Co. Ltd. v Sabharathanam AIR 2009 KER 71
 Kishan Rao v. Bidar District Legal Services Authority AIR 2001 KAR 407
 Union of India v. Ananta AIR 2007 SC 1561
 B.P. Moideen Sevamandir and Anr. V. A.M. Kutty Hassan AIR 2008 SC (supp)1123
 State of Punjab v. Jalour Singh AIR 2008 SC 1209
 Sampurna Behrua v. Union of India [(2011) 9 SCC 801]
 National Legal Services Authority v. Union of India (2014) 5 SCC 438
 Sugreev Alias Jagdish and Ors. V. Smt. Sushila Bai and Ors. [AIR 2003 RAJ 149]
 Kalaben Kalabhai Desai v. Alabhai Karamshibhai Desai, Air 2000 GUJ 232 (233):
(2000) 4 cur cc 419
 Pyla Bangarraju v. Pyla Venkata Ramakrisha and Anr. [2010 (5) ALD728]
 Supreme Court Legal Aid Committee v. Union of India & Ors. [(1998)5 SCC 762]
 Laxmi v. Union of India (Supreme Court) [(2014) 4 SCC 427]
 Suo Moto Writ Petition (Supreme Court) [Air 201 sc 2815, (2014) 4 SCC 786]
 State of Punjab v. Jalour Singh and others[AIR 2008 SC 1209, (2008) 2 SCC 660]
 Bar Council of India v. Union of India [(2012) 8 SCC 243, AIR 2012 SC 3246]
 Pt Thomas v. Thomas Job [(2005) 6 SCC 478, AIR 2005 SC 3575]
 Madhya Pradesh Legal Services Authority (MPSLSA) v. Prateek Jain and Another
[(2014) 10 SCC 690]
 Abul Hassan and National Legal Services Authority v. Delhi Vidyut Board & Ors.
[AIR 1999 DEL 88.]
 All Guwahati Educated Unemployed Hawkers Association and etc. v. All Guwahati
Municipal Corporation and Ors. etc. (High Court Of Gauhati) [2006 SCC OnLine Gau
18, AIR 2006 Gau 132]
 KN Govindam Kutty Menon v. CD Shaji [(2012) 2 SCC 51]
 State of Maharashtra v. Manubhai Pragji Vashi and others (1995) SCC 6, 730
 M.I. Ibrahim Kutty v. Indian Overseas Bank, Maruthanvode Branch [AIR 2005 Mad
335]
 Chaluvadi Murali Krishna v. District Legal Service Authority, Prakasam District,
Ongole [AIR 2013 AP 41]
 Jatavath Sali v. Mandal Parishad Development officer and another. [2006 (2) ALT
217]
 Sreedharan T. and Ors. Vs. Sub Inspector of Police and Anr. [2009 CriLJ 1249,
ILR2009 (1) Kerala 111]

1
 State of Kerala and Anr. Vs. Ernakulam District Legal Service Authority and Ors.
[AIR 2008 Ker 70, ILR 2008 (1) Kerala 119]
 Dakshinanchal Vidyut Vitran Nigam Ltd. and Others V. M/s. Prakancha Metal Works
Pvt. Ltd. [2012 (9) ADJ 112, AIR 2012 All 176]
 Amod Prasad Ram V. The State of Jharkhand, Jharkhand State Legal Services
Authority and District Legal Services Authority [2007(2)BLJR2006,
[2007(3)JCR283(Jhr)]]
 Anita Chauhan V. State of Haryana and Ors. [(2003)133PLR185]
 S. Manila Panicker v. Tito Abraham
 K.N. Govind Kutty Menon v. C.D. Shaji
 Punjab National Bank v. Lakshmi Chand Rai
 D.K. Yadav v. J.M.A. Industries Ltd.
 Moni Mathai v. Federal Bank Ltd. and Recovery Officer, Debts Recovery Tribunal.
 Commr. Karnataka State Public Instruction (Education) v. Nirupadi Virbhadrappa
Shiva Simpi

2
 INTRODUCTION
“No polity can claim to be just if it cannot provide access to justice for all the sections of its
population.”1 The Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987, was passed by the Indian Parliament
to ensure free legal services to the weaker sections of society and for the purpose of
establishing Lok Adalat on a uniform basis throughout the country. Having emerged as the
outcome of consolidated efforts to sub serve the aspirations of equal justice to its seekers2, the
underlying reason behind its enactment is to effectuate the objectives enshrined in Article 39-
A of the Constitution.

The Act seeks to bring justice closer home through the instruments of legal aid and Lok
Adalat. The present Chapter examines the efficacy of the Legal Services Authorities Act,
1987, as a catalyst to revolutionize access to justice in the country, particularly through the
establishment of Lok Adalat.

The National Legal Services Authority Rules, 1995,3 and the National Legal Services (Lok
Adalat) Regulations,2009,4 which make stipulations regarding the composition, conduct and
organization of Lok Adalat in the country, have been discussed wherever necessary. The Goa
Lok Adalat Scheme which provides for the organization and procedure to be followed by the
Lok Adalat in the State has also been examined.

The organization of Lok Adalat being a core function under the Act, several states have laid
down detailed regulations for holding Lok Adalat while other States have taken care of this
aspect through rule –making.5 Special emphasis has been placed on the dynamics of Lok
Adalat and Permanent Lok Adalat as a vehicle to effective access to justice so as to bring out
the facilitative and pre-emptive aspects of the Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987, of which
it forms the pivot. Judicial opinion regarding the material aspects of the functioning of Lok
Adalat also forms a part of the chapter.

1
http://pib.nic.in/newsite/terms last viewed on 15/09/2019
2
3 Supra. Chapter III. Under the auspices of Committee of Legal Aid Schemes (CILAS) Lok Adalat
first started out as an experiment in Junagarh, in the State of Gujarat in 1982, from where it spread to
several states in India.
3
The National Legal Services Authority Rules 1995 vide G.S.R.762(E)dated 27th November,1995,
published in the Gazette of India, Extn., PT. II, Sec.3(ii)dated 27th November, 1995.
4
The National Legal Services Authority (Lok Adalat) Regulations, 2009, vide Notification No.
L/28/09-NALSA(ADVT-III/4)123/09/EXTY, DT.14.10. 2009.National Legal Services Authority is
abbreviated as NALSA.
5
Goa, Andhra Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh, Punjab and West Bengal. See Murali Dhar, Law, Poverty,
and Legal Aid: Access to Criminal Justice (Lexis Nexis, Butterworths, New Delhi ,2004) p.121.

3
Scheme of the Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987
The Legal Services Authorities Act, 19876 is a path breaking legislation that unfolds the
noble vision and the pragmatic action for social justice envisioned in the Constitution. The
provisions of the Act, except Chapter III, came into force on 9th November 19957.

The Legal Services Authorities Act is a concise enactment consisting of thirty sections only.
The first part of the Act deals extensively with the constitution and functions of various
authorities and legal aid. The second part outlines the framework for the organization,
procedure and functioning of Lok Adalat. Its strategy for pursuing the goal of equal justice to
all is through the legal aid and Lok Adalat schemes coordinated by the authorities specifically
designated under the Act.

Authorities under the Act

There are several authorities created under the Legal Services Authorities Act,1987, to ensure
the efficient organization of free legal services in the country.8 Chapter II and Chapter III of
the Act deals with the constitution and functions of the authorities under the Act. The Act in
the first place provides for the setting up of the National Legal Services Authority9, the State
Legal Services Authorities10 in different States and the District Legal Services Authorities11
at the district levels. The National Legal Services Authority (NALSA) acts as the apex and
nodal agency for laying down schemes, principles, guidelines and policies for the purpose of
making legal services available as provided under the Act.12In every State a State Legal

6
Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987 (Act No.39 of 1987) received the assent of the President on
11th October 1987 and was published in the Gazette of India Extraordinary Part II, Sec.I. No.55dated
12/10/1987
7
The coming into force of the Legal Services Authorities Act was delayed on account of disapproval
by the judiciary and the legal fraternity. The Legal Services Authorities Act ,1987 as amended by the
Legal Services Authorities (Amendment) Act 1994 received the assent of the President on 29th
October 1994 and was published in the Gazette of India on 31st October 1994. See Murali Dhar,
Law, Poverty, and Legal Aid: Access to Criminal Justice (Lexis Nexis, Butterworths, New Delhi
,2004) p.112
8
Under section 29A of the Legal Services Authorities Act,1987, the Goa State Legal Services
Authority Regulations,1998 have been enacted.
9
Section 3, 4 and 5 of Legal Services Authorities Act,1987, for constitution and functions of
National Legal Services Authority.
10
Ibid. Section 6. See also The Goa State Legal Services Authority Rules,1996 for the number,
experience and qualifications of other members of State Authority
11
Ibid. Section 9. See also The Goa State Legal Services Authority Rules,1996, for the number,
experience and qualifications of members of the District Authority.
12
See NALSA Rules 1995(Vide Notn. No. G. S. R. 762 (E) dated.27th November, 1995, published
in the Gazette of India, Ext. pt. II, S.3(ii) dt. 27 – 11 – 1995) and NALSA (Lok Adalat) Regulations,
2009.

4
Services Authority13 is constituted to give effect to the policies and directions of the Central
Authority (NALSA), to give legal services to the people and conduct Lok Adalat in the
State.14

A District Legal Services Authority15 is constituted in every District to organize Lok Adalat
in the district.16 The constitution of certain Committees such as the Supreme Court Legal
Services Committee17, the High Court Legal Services Committee18and the Taluka Legal
Services Committee is laid down under the Act.19 The Act provides for the overseeing and
supervision of the functioning of the authorities and committees constituted at each level.20

Entitlement to legal services

The Legal Services Authorities Act also makes provision for legal aid to the economically
weaker sections of society.21 Chapter IV of the Act lays down the criteria for giving such
assistance and states who is entitled to receive the same.22

Provision for finances for implementing Legal Aid

Schemes

13
State Legal Services Authority is headed by the Chief Justice of the State High Court who is its
Patron-in-Chief. A serving or retired Judge of the High Court is nominated as its Executive
Chairman and such number of other members possessing such experience and qualifications as may
be prescribed by the State Government, to be nominated by that Government in consultation with the
Chief Justice of the High Court.
14
Section 7(2)(b). See also Regulation 4 of the Goa State Legal Services Authority
Regulations,1998.
15
The District Judge in of the District is its ex-officio Chairman.
16
Section10(2)(b). See also Regulation 10 of the Goa State Legal Services Authority
Regulations,1998
17
Ibid. Section 3-A
18
Ibid. Section 8-A. See also Regulations 5-7 of the Goa State Legal Services Authority
Regulations,1998.
19
Section11-A of Act. Taluk Legal Services Committees are constituted for each of the Taluk or
Mandal or for group of Taluk or Mandals to coordinate the activities of legal services in the Taluk
and to organize Lok Adalats. Its function is also to organize Lok Adalats within the district under
section11-B(b). See the Goa State Legal Services Authority Rules which stipulate the number,
experience and qualifications of members of the Taluka Legal Services Committee.
20
The Act provides for the supervision of the functioning of the State Legal Services Authorities by
the National Legal Services Authority and in case of the District Legal Services Authorities by the
State Legal Services Authorities. Likewise, the Committees mentioned above are required to perform
the functions as assigned to them by the respective authority within whose jurisdiction they function.
21
The National Legal Services Authority (Free and Competent Legal Services) Regulations,2010 has
made stipulations regarding free legal services. See also Regulations 16- 21 of the Goa State Legal
Services Authority Regulations,1998.
22
See Rule 14 of the Goa State Legal Services Authority Rules,1996.

5
The Legal Services Authorities Act also provides for the allocation of funds and grants to be
utilized to carry out and implement the objectives of the Act. Chapter V of the Act stipulates
the establishment of the National Legal Aid Fund, State and District Legal Aid Funds.

Statutory Scheme for Lok Adalat

Besides legal aid, the organization of Lok Adalat is also an important function of the National
and State Authorities and the Committees constituted by them. Chapter VI of the Legal
Services Authorities Act,1987, lays down the scheme for the organization and functioning of
Lok Adalat.

Definition of Lok Adalat

The term ‘Lok Adalat’ referred to in Chapter VI has been defined in Chapter 1 of the Act.
Although not specifically explained, the term Lok Adalat is defined in section 2(1)(d) of the
Act as “Lok Adalat organized under Chapter VI.” One significant highlight of the Legal
Services Authorities Act, 1987, is that it has not altered the traditional meaning, the term
‘Lok Adalat’ has come to be associated with23.

Literally, “People’s Court”24, Lok Adalat as envisaged under the Legal Services Authorities
Act, have only a few features in common with the formal courts. Like courts, they too, are
official instrumentalities constituted and recognized by the State to deliver justice.25 As
institutions created to sub serve the aspirations of justice of the people, Lok Adalat resolve
disputes only after careful deliberation as do the courts, thereby qualifying as People’s Courts
in letter and spirit.26

Under the Legal Services Authorities Act, two kinds of Lok Adalat are envisaged. The first is
a Lok Adalat constituted under Section 19 of the Act which has no adjudicatory functions or
powers and which discharges purely conciliatory functions. The second is a Permanent Lok
Adalat established under section 22-B (1) of Legal Services Authorities Act to exercise
jurisdiction in respect of public utility services, having both conciliatory and adjudicatory
functions. It will not be out of place to mention that after the constitution of the Central

23
See Madhava Menon, N.R, “Lok Adalat: People’s Programme for Speedy Justice”, (1986) IBR 13 (2) 129
24
As ‘Lok’ stands for people and the vernacular meaning of the term ‘Adalat’ is court. Dr. Justice Lakshmana,
Voice of Justice (First Edition, Universal Law Publishing Co. Pvt. Ltd., Delhi. ,2006) p.253.
25
See Rayappa K.M. H., Lok Adalat: Objectives, Prerequisites, Strategies and Organization. (1987) IBR 14 (4)
711.
26
Sarkar, S.K., Law Relating to Lok Adalat and Legal Aid, (First Edition Reprint, Orient Publishing Company,
Allahabad, 2006), p.104

6
Authority and the establishment of National Legal Services Authority in 1998, Permanent
and Continuous Lok Adalat have been created in all the Districts in the country, for the
disposal of pending matters as well as disputes at pre-litigative stage.27

The Supreme Court in Interglobe Aviation v. N. Satchidanand28 clarified that the word
‘Permanent Lok Adalat’ refers only to Permanent Lok Adalat established under section
22B(1) of the Legal Services Authorities Act and not to the Lok Adalat constituted under
section 19, as there seemed to be confusion regarding the name and description received by
Lok Adalat in some States.29 It is heartening to find that the Apex Court has laid to rest
doubts regarding the nomenclature of the Lok Adalat which probably arose on account of the
intermittent sittings by the latter.

Constitution of Lok Adalat

The Act contemplates justice at the door step by the organization of Lok Adalat at various
levels. The Act contains provisions for the establishment and constitution of Lok Adalat not
only at the State level but also at the district and taluka levels.30

Although no specific mention is made regarding the organization of Lok Adalat at the village
level, disputes that arise at the village level, may be taken for settlement by the Lok Adalat
organized by the District Legal Services Authorities or Taluka Legal Services Authorities.
Besides, as and when found necessary, the Authorities may be approached for organizing Lok
Adalat at the village level also, which is clear from the language of the relevant provision.31
Probably its potential to meet the exigencies of the situation, prompted Justice P.N.
Bhagwati32 to comment thus, “Until now the litigating parties had to bang the doors of law

27
A Permanent and Continuous Lok Adalat Scheme has been formulated and implemented to
establish Lok Adalats under Section 19 of the Act in all the districts of the country. Under this
scheme, the Lok Adalats are now organized regularly at designated venues, even away from court
complexes and the cases which remain unsettled are taken up in the next Lok Adalat. Lok Adalats
have thus acquired permanency and continuity and are no more occasional, available at
http://nalsa.gov.in/last viewed on 21/09/2019
28
AIR 2011 SC1989
29
In many states, when Lok Adalats are constituted under section 19 of LSA Act for regular or
continuous sittings (as contrasted from periodical sittings), they are also erroneously called as
Permanent Lok Adalats even though they do not have adjudicatory functions.
30
Organization of Lok Adalats – Section 19 (1) Every State Authority or District Authority or the
Supreme Court Legal Services Committee or every High Court Legal Services Committee or, as the
case may be, Taluka Legal Services Committee may organize Lok Adalats at such intervals and
places and for exercising such jurisdiction and for such areas as it thinks fit.
31
Ibid.
32
Former Chief Justice of India.

7
courts for justice .Now under the Lok Adalat system, justice is taken to the door step of the
parties.”33

Organization of Lok Adalat

The Act stipulates that Lok Adalat may be held at regular intervals and at such places as
deemed fit.34 Although Lok Adalat are a fixed and continuous institution, its frequency of
sittings is ordinarily determined by the Legal Services Authorities concerned.35 Information
regarding the date, place time , names of the panel members and the cases to be taken up
about the impending Lok Adalat, is made available well in advance.36 There is wide publicity
given about the Lok Adalat sitting , in newspapers, Legal Services Authorities websites and
by notices pasted on the doors of the Court premises.

In practice, as per the Lok Adalat schemes of the States, generally Lok Adalat are a held on
the weekends and at times even on holidays.37 Perhaps such an arrangement has been worked
out to make it convenient for people, whether working or otherwise, to attend and participate
in the Lok Adalat. As far as the functioning of Lok Adalat on week- ends and holidays is
concerned, it may be a step in the right direction as the arrangement may ensure larger public
participation. But at the same time, with its sittings being organized intermittently, the
likelihood of the Lok Adalat system being internalized by the public, may take an even longer
period of time. If on the other hand, Lok Adalat functioned on a day- to -day basis these
changes may possibly add to their success. An important aspect of Lok Adalat is that as in the
case of regular courts, cases are taken up in the Lok Adalat in the open and in public, in the
presence of all other disputants who have assembled for their respective cases.

Moreover, where parties are willing to settle their differences, the members of Lok Adalat
actively and openly assist the parties in reaching a compromise. Moreover, Lok Adalat are
generally conducted in the court premises which gives them sanctity, as though they were a

33
Justice Gupta J.V., Lok Adalat and the Poor, Nyaya Path, December 2000, Year:1 Issue:4, p. 85.
34
Section 19(1) Legal Services Authorities Act,1987
35
Ibid. See also Regulation 3 of NALSA (Lok Adalat) Regulations ,2009
36
See Regulations 3-5, NALSA (Lok Adalat) Regulations,2009, where prior intimation of the
proposal to hold Lok Adalat to the State Legal Services Authority and notice to the parties concerned
is stipulated.
37
See also Regulation 8 of NALSA (Lok Adalat) Regulations,2009. See also Goa Lok Adalat
Scheme – HOLDING OF LOK ADALAT—A Lok Adalat may be organized at such time and place
and on such days, including Saturdays, Sundays, and holidays as the State Authority, High Court
Legal Services Committee, as the case may be, organizing the Lok Adalat deems appropriate.

8
court.38 Thus, in consonance with the law relating to access to justice, impartiality,
transparency and independence of the justice -delivery mechanism is sought to be achieved
by the Legal Services Authorities Act.

Composition of the Lok Adalat Bench39

The Legal Services Authorities Act, lays down the composition of the panel that settles
disputes brought before it. According to the Act, Lok Adalat are to consist of three members
including a sitting or retired judicial officer, a member of the legal profession and other
person40 which includes a social worker,41 who are to be guided by the principles of justice,
42
equity, fair play and other legal principles while determining any reference before it. The
composition reflects a judicious blend of persons trained in the law and those with adequate
experience in social service. Legislative intention in balancing informal yet effective
dispensation of justice founded on solid legal principles is clearly stipulated in the panel
composition. The provision for the inclusion of a social worker preferably a woman43 is
probably is to shift the emphasis from technicalities to principles of equity, justice and good
conscience for the purpose of ensuring a fair and equitable justice system which is the
primary objective behind the enactment of the Legal Services Authorities Act,1987.44 As is
evident , the panel of Lok Adalat members is to be drawn from amongst the Bench and the
Bar and from amongst those involved in social work.45 The qualifications and experience of

38
At times Mobile Lok Adalat are also held which are not conducted in the court premises.
39
The term ‘Bench’ has been used in the National Legal Services Authority (Lok Adalat)
Regulations, 2009.However in the present study, the terms ‘bench’ and ‘panel’ with reference to the
Lok Adalat have been used interchangeably.
40
Goa State Legal Services Authority Rules. 1996: The experience and qualifications of ‘other
persons’ of the Lok Adalat referred to in cl. (b) of sub-section (2) of sec. 19 other than referred to in
sub-section (3) of sec. 19—(a) an eminent Social Worker who is engaged in the upliftment of the
weaker sections of the people; including Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes, women, children, rural
and urban labour; or (b) a lawyer of standing; or(c) a person of repute who is specially interested in
the implementation of the Legal Services Schemes and Programmes
41
S.19 (3) and (4) Legal Services Authorities Act 1987. The number qualifications and experience of
other members of the Lok Adalat are prescribed by the Central Government or State Government
through rules in consultation with the Chief Justice of India or the Chief Justice of the High Court as
the case may be. See also Regulation 6 of NALSA (Lok Adalat) Regulations,2009.
42
Ibid.S.20(4) LSA
43
At the taluka level under the Goa Lok Adalat Scheme.
44
Article 39-A.
45
Goa State Legal Services Authority Rules. 1996: The experience and qualifications of other
persons of the Lok Adalat referred to in cl. (b) of sub-section (2) of sec. 19 other than referred to in
sub-section (3) of sec. 19—A person shall not be qualified to be included in the Bench of Lok Adalat
unless he is:— (a) an eminent Social Worker who is engaged in the upliftment of the weaker sections
of the people; including Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes, women, children, rural and urban

9
 46
the members has been provided for in the rules made to this effect, thereby ensuring
competency, expertise and independence of the dispensers of justice.

Although the qualifications and experience of panel members has been provided for, there
does not seem to be a procedure in place for selecting the panel members.47 In such a
situation, subjective satisfaction of the Chairpersons of the Legal Services Committees could
interfere with the smooth working of the institution. Thus, whether the composition of the
Lok Adalat is adequate to ensure the faith and confidence of public on it, is questionable.
Nonetheless, keeping in mind the larger objective of the Act which is to provide social justice
as envisaged under the Constitution, the composition of the panel may be suitable in giving
effect to that objective. Indisputably, Lok Adalat have their eyes on achieving social goals in
a harmonious manner which would restore peace not just in the family, but to the locality and
community at large.48

Levels of Lok Adalats:

o At the State Authority Level

The Member Secretary of the State Legal Services Authority organizing the Lok Adalat
would constitute benches of the Lok Adalat, each bench comprising of a sitting or retired
judge of the High Court or a sitting or retired judicial officer and any one or both of- a
member from the legal profession; a social worker engaged in the upliftment of the weaker
sections and interested in the implementation of legal services schemes or programmes.

o At High Court Level

The Secretary of the High Court Legal Services Committee would constitute benches of the
Lok Adalat, each bench comprising of a sitting or retired judge of the High Court and any one
or both of- a member from the legal profession; a social worker engaged in the upliftment of
the weaker sections and interested in the implementation of legal services schemes or
programmes.

labour; or (b) a lawyer of standing; or(c) a person of repute who is specially interested in the
implementation of the Legal Services Schemes and Programmes
46
National Legal Services Authority Rules, 1995.
47
Justice Agarwal B.D., Transformation in trial system in India, Vol. VIII, Issue 1, Nyaya Deep,
January 2007, p.76
48
Professor Dr. Sharma S.S., Public Courts and Access to Justice, Civil and Military Law Journal,
Vol.43, Numbers 3 and 4, July – December 2007, p. 73.

10
 o At District Level

The Secretary of the District Legal Services Authority organizing the Lok Adalat would
constitute benches of the Lok Adalat, each bench comprising of a sitting or retired judicial
officer and any one or both of either a member from the legal profession; and/or a social
worker engaged in the upliftment of the weaker sections and interested in the implementation
of legal services schemes or programmes or a person engaged in para-legal activities of the
area, preferably a woman.

o At Taluk Level

The Secretary of the Taluk Legal Services Committee organizing the Lok Adalat would
constitute benches of the Lok Adalat, each bench comprising of a sitting or retired judicial
officer and any one or both of either a member from the legal profession; and/or a social
worker engaged in the upliftment of the weaker sections and interested in the implementation
of legal services schemes or programmes or a person engaged in para-legal activities of the
area, preferably a woman.

o National Lok Adalat

National Level Lok Adalats are held for at regular intervals where on a single day Lok
Adalats are held throughout the country, in all the courts right from the Supreme Court till the
Taluk Levels wherein cases are disposed off in huge numbers. From February 2015, National
Lok Adalats are being held on a specific subject matter every month.

o Permanent Lok Adalat

The other type of Lok Adalat is the Permanent Lok Adalat, organized under Section 22-B of
The Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987. Permanent Lok Adalats have been set up as
permanent bodies with a Chairman and two members for providing compulsory pre-litigative
mechanism for conciliation and settlement of cases relating to Public Utility Services like
transport, postal, telegraph etc. Here, even if the parties fail to reach to a settlement, the
Permanent Lok Adalat gets jurisdiction to decide the dispute, provided, the dispute does not
relate to any offence. Further, the Award of the Permanent Lok Adalat is final and binding on
all the parties. The jurisdiction of the Permanent Lok Adalats is upto Rs. Ten Lakhs. Here if

11
the parties fail to reach to a settlement, the Permanent Lok Adalat has the jurisdiction to
decide the case. The award of the Permanent Lok Adalat is final and binding upon the parties.
The Lok Adalat may conduct the proceedings in such a manner as it considers appropriate,
taking into account the circumstances of the case, wishes of the parties like requests to hear
oral statements, speedy settlement of dispute etc.

o Mobile Lok Adalats

Mobile Lok Adalats are also organized in various parts of the country which travel from one
location to another to resolve disputes in order to facilitate the resolution of disputes through
this mechanism.

As on 30.09.2015, more than 15.14 lakhs Lok Adalats have been organized in the country
since its inception. More than 8.25 crore cases have been settled by this mechanism so far.

Critical Analysis of Permanent Lok Adalats

The Legal Services Authorities Act was amended in 2002, with the inclusion of Chapter VI-
A49 relating to Pre- Litigation Conciliation and Settlement. The amendment Act provides for
the establishment of Permanent Lok Adalats50 to exercise jurisdiction in respect of public
utility services to further the objective of speedy and inexpensive justice to litigants. This
novel feature introduced in the Act, empowers the Lok Adalats to settle cases with respect to
Public Utility services, even before they are filed in the Court.51 Various public utility
services have been categorized whereby pre-litigation cases in respect of these services can
be taken cognizance for the purpose of the chapter.52

It is clear from the same that all other disputes are excluded from the ambit of Permanent Lok
Adalats.53 Accordingly, the law stipulates that any party in a dispute with respect to a PUS

49
Inserted by Act 37 of 2002 dated 11.6.2002.
50
Section 22-B
51
Section 22 C (1)
52
Section 22-A (b) A public utility service for this purpose means transport service for the carriage
of passengers or goods by air, road or water; or postal, telegraph or telephone service; or supply of
power, light or water to the public by any establishment; system of public conservancy or sanitation;
service in hospital or dispensary; or insurance service; and includes any service which the Central
Government or the State Government as the case may be, in the public interest, by notification,
declare to be a public utility service for the purposes of this Chapter.
53
Section 22- C LSA- Disputes with the exception of non-compoundable offences come within the
jurisdiction of regular Lok Adalat.

12
may, before the dispute is brought before any court, make an application to such Permanent
Lok Adalats for its settlement.54

The Act clearly stipulates that the Permanent Lok Adalats have no jurisdiction to deal with
any matter relating to an offence not compoundable under any law and it has also limited
their jurisdiction to matters where the value of the property does not exceed twenty five lakhs
of rupees.55 In various cases, the High Courts have ruled that Permanent Lok Adalats have no
inherent jurisdiction to adjudicate or decide issues relating to the grant of permanent
injunction, declaration or fraud, even where the parties agree to submit to their jurisdiction.56

The Act lays down that where the dispute is brought before the Permanent Lok Adalat, the
parties thereto are barred from invoking the jurisdiction of the court of law in the same
dispute.57 Where a dispute is brought before it, the Permanent Lok Adalats are required to
deal with matters and decide such disputes by assisting the parties in their attempt to reach an
amicable settlement of the dispute in an independent and impartial manner.58

Where no settlement is arrived at, the Permanent Lok Adalat is empowered to decide the
dispute on merits.59 Although the provision is very unambiguous and clear in its terms, the
Supreme Court in Life Insurance Corporation v. Suresh Kumar60 held that the Permanent
Lok Adalat is not a regular court authorized to adjudicate the dispute between the parties on
merits. The Court mentioned further that the Permanent Lok Adalat had no jurisdiction or
authority vested in it to decide any ‘lis’ as such between the parties, even where the attempt
to arrive at an agreed settlement between the parties has failed.

Although no specific procedure is made out in the Legal Services Authorities Act, the latter
expressly lays down that the Permanent Lok Adalat while deciding the dispute on merits is
not bound by the Code of Civil Procedure 1908 and the Indian Evidence Act ,1872.61 This
provision which enables the Permanent Lok Adalats to determine the dispute in the event of
failure of settlement has a two- fold objective. In the first place, it would help to avoid a

54
Ibid. Sec.22C (1). Section 22 (2) stipulates: After an application is made under sub-section (1) to
the Permanent Lok Adalat, no party to that application shall invoke jurisdiction of any court in the
same dispute.
55
Section 22 C (1)
56
Kanti Devi v. State of Bihar (AIR 2012 Patna 86). See also (NOC) 221 (P&H).
57
22 (2) (c).
58
Section 22-C (5)
59
Section 22-C (8). See also proviso to Section 22 C (1) The section does not provide for Permanent
Lok Adalat to have jurisdiction in respect of non-compoundable offences and in respect of matters
where the property in dispute exceeds twenty-five lakh rupees.
60
(2011)7 SCC491.
61
Section 22 -D

13
protracted dispute which may have resulted in irretrievable damage to either party to the
dispute. Secondly, it indirectly would help reduce the burden on the regular courts and thus
enable the courts to concentrate on other cases requiring application of the mind. At the same
time, the tardy procedures followed in the courts of law would not be very suitable for the
adjudication of disputes relating to public utility services.

Besides being in consonance with the age-old adage, “prevention is always better than cure”,
the concept of Permanent Lok Adalats is clearly poor- friendly in as much as it allows a
person from the lowest level to get judicial relief and justice without much delay and
expense.62 Furthermore, the Permanent Lok Adalats are to be manned by a person who holds
or has held a judicial office of a District Judge or an Additional District Judge or has held
judicial office higher in rank than that of a District Judge , who shall be its Chairman, and
two other persons having adequate experience in public utility services, to be nominated by
the Central or State government on recommendation of the Central or State authority as the
case maybe.63 The legislative intent of having non-judicial members in a tribunal like the
Permanent Lok Adalat , according to the Supreme Court of India, “is to make sure that the
legal technicalities do not get paramount in conciliation or adjudicatory proceedings.”64

While conducting conciliation proceedings or deciding a dispute, the panel of the Permanent
Lok Adalat is required to be guided by the principles of natural justice, objectivity, fair play,
equity and other principles of justice.65 Thus, while bringing an end to lengthy proceedings
and giving a go-bye to the complexities of procedural laws, Permanent Lok Adalats also
ensure the independence and competency of the members forming it.

Finally, every award of the Permanent Lok Adalat should be made by a majority of the
persons constituting it.66 Where fears were expressed regarding the composition of the
Permanent Lok Adalat comprising of two non-judicial members, the Supreme Court dispelled
the fears observing in Bar Council of India v. Union of India67, that even where the two
non-judicial members disagree with the judicial member in respect of a matter, that does not
mean that such majority decision lacks in fairness or sense of justice. Where an award was
passed by the Chairman sitting singly, the award of the Permanent Lok Adalat was held to be

62
Agarwal B.D., New Road to Speedy Justice, Vol. V Issue 2, Nyaya Deep, April –June 2002, p. 16.
63
Sec. 22 B.
64
Bar Council of India v. Union of India (2012)8SCC243.
65
Ibid. Sec 22D.
66
Section22-E (3).
67
(2012) 8 SCC 243

14
invalid and liable to be set aside as it was in clear violation of statutory provisions.68
Moreover, an award which is made either on merit or in terms of a settlement agreement, is
final and binding on all the parties and cannot be called into question in any original suit,
application or execution proceeding .69 As the award passed is final, there is no further need
for reconsideration in panel or review.70 This aspect therefore brings an early end to the
proceedings.

Deemed to be a decree of the civil court, the Lok Adalat is empowered to transmit the award
made by it, to the Civil Court for execution.71 Thus the award of the Lok Adalat which has
the status of a decree of a civil court, being final and permanent, ensures that litigation among
the parties is ended within a reasonable span of time. Many fears with regard to the
Permanent Lok Adalats had been voiced through a writ petition, the Supreme Court of India
in S.N. Pandey v. Union of India,72 dismissed the petition and held that the said Amendment
to the Act was valid. The Court observed that the Permanent Lok Adalats introduced by
amendment to the LSA, were established for deciding disputes in which specified public
utility services are one of the parties involved, for decreasing workload in courts, and for the
purpose of ensuring that justice is available to litigant speedily and impartially.73

The Supreme Court reiterated in Bar Council of India v. Union of India74, that the
establishment of PLA and conferring on them jurisdiction up to a specified pecuniary limit is
not anathema to the rule of law. Alternative institutional mechanisms for the adjudication of
disputes cannot be said to be contrary to the constitutional scheme or against the rule of law.
The Apex Court was clearly of the opinion that institutional mechanisms with adjudicatory
powers set up by law cannot be faulted on the ground of arbitrariness or irrationality where
the principles of natural justice are complied with. The Court also explained that no person
has a constitutional right to have the dispute adjudicated by means of a court only and if at all
a party to a dispute has a grievance against the award of the Permanent Lok Adalat, he can
always approach the High Court under its supervisory and extraordinary jurisdiction under
articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India.

68
Reliance General Insurance Company v. Subhash Gupta AIR 2013(NOC) 69(P &H).
69
Sec 22 E (1), (2).
70
Section 22-E (4).
71
Ibid. Sec 22E (4), (5).
72
Writ Petition (Civil) No.543/2002 decided on 28.10.2002 available at
http://judis.nic.in/supremecourt/imgs1.aspx?filename=39448. See also (2012) 8 SCC 261.
73
(2012) 8 SCC 261.
74
AIR 2012 SC 3246.

15
In conclusion, it may be said that where disputes occur in respect of public utility services,
Permanent Lok Adalats are empowered to resolve such disputes at the earliest opportunity
before they are instituted before the court for adjudication. The establishment of Permanent
Lok Adalats has opened a single window and independent judicial redressal forum providing
prospective litigants a scope for pre- litigation conciliation and settlement of cases.75 The
importance of the Permanent Lok Adalat lies in its ability to promote and protect the welfare
of consumers who are able to resolve their disputes with the Public Utility Services in a
straightforward and unsophisticated manner. As discussed, Lok Adalats in the country are
governed by the Legal Services Authorities Act, Rules, Regulations and Schemes made there
under. Lok Adalats in several States are also regulated by schemes drawn up by for the
purpose.76

Justice is the most important component of any civilized society and the role of judiciary
becomes significant in dispensing justice. The number of pending cases before the court has
shown a tremendous increase which has led to pendency and delay in the disposition of the
case. In such a scenario, access to justice through Alternative Dispute Resolution (Hereinafter
ADR) becomes important. Lok Adalat is one of the fine and familiar mechanism of ADR
which has been playing an important role in the settlement of disputes.77 The institution of
Lok Adalat has deep roots in Indian legal history and has played a significant role in
providing justice to the Indian society.78 Lok Adalat acquired its statutory status from The
Legal Services Authority Act, 1987 and constitutional mandate as provided in Article39A of
the Constitution. The main objective of Lok Adalat is to provide free legal services to the
weaker section of the society and ensure the opportunity for securing justice is not denied.79
Though through Lok Adalat, disputes can be settled in a simpler, quicker and cost-effective
way but dispute cannot be settled if both parties do not give their consent for settlement.

75
Section 22-A LSA,1987.
76
The Lok Adalat Scheme was drawn up by the Central Authority in exercise of the powers
conferred by Section 4(b)of the Legal Services Authorities Act,1987 (No.39 of 1987) as amended.
See Sarkar S.K., Law Relating to Lok Adalat and Legal Aid (First Edition, Reprint, Orient
Publishing Company, Allahabad,2006,) p.335
77
Justice Jitendra N. Bhatt, A Round Table Justice Through Lok-Adalat (Peoples' Court)— A Vibrant-ADR-In
India available at http://www.ebc-india.com/lawyer/articles/2002v1a3.htm, last visited on 9th October, 2019
78
Karthyaeni.V and Vidhi Bhatt, Lok Adalats And Permanent Lok Adalats ,A Scope For Judicial Review-A
Critical Study, available at: http://www.legalserviceindia.com/articles/lok_a.htm, last visited on 9th October,
2019
79
Justice P.S. Narayana, Law relating to Lok Adalats, Asia law house, 3rd ed. 2004

16
The lack of power to make binding decision without the consent of the parties was seen as a
major drawbackin the functioning of Lok Adalat which led to unnecessary delay in the
dispensation of justice. Thus, in 2002 Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987 was amended and
Chapter VI A was introduced providing for a Permanent Lok Adalat. Permanent Lok Adalat
was introduced to deal with pre-litigation, conciliation and settlement of disputes relating to
Public Utility Services which would result in reducing the work load of the regular courts to a
great extent.80

The Legal Services Authorities Act was amended in 2002, with the inclusion of Chapter VI-
A81 relating to Pre- Litigation Conciliation and Settlement. The amendment Act provides for
the establishment of Permanent Lok Adalats82 to exercise jurisdiction in respect of public
utility services to further the objective of speedy and inexpensive justice to litigants. This
novel feature introduced in the Act, empowers the Lok Adalats to settle cases with respect to
Public Utility services, even before they are filed in the Court.83 Various public utility
services have been categorized whereby pre-litigation cases in respect of these services can
be taken cognizance for the purpose of the chapter.84 It is clear from the same that all other
disputes are excluded from the ambit of Permanent Lok Adalats.85 Accordingly, the law
stipulates that any party in a dispute with respect to a PUS may, before the dispute is brought
before any court, make an application to such Permanent Lok Adalats for its settlement.86 The
Act clearly stipulates that the Permanent Lok Adalats have no jurisdiction to deal with any
matter relating to an offence not compoundable under any law and it has also limited their
jurisdiction to matters where the value of the property does not exceed twenty five lakhs of
rupees.87 In various cases, the High Courts have ruled that Permanent Lok Adalats have no

80
Permanent Lok Adalat For Utility Service,Available at
http://delhicourts.nic.in/PLAPUS%20Broucher%202008.pdf, last visited on 9th October,2019.
81
Inserted by Act 37 of 2002 dated 11.6.2002.
82
Section 22-B
83
Section 22 C (1)
84
Section 22-A (b) A public utility service for this purpose means transport service for the carriage of
passengers or goods by air, road or water; or postal, telegraph or telephone service; or supply of power, light or
water to the public by any establishment; system of public conservancy or sanitation; service in hospital or
dispensary; or insurance service; and includes any service which the Central Government or the State
Government as the case may be, in the public interest, by notification, declare to be a public utility service for
the purposes of this Chapter.
85
Section 22- C LSA- Disputes with the exception of non-compoundable offences come within the jurisdiction
of regular Lok Adalat.
86
Ibid. Sec.22C (1). Section 22 (2) stipulates: After an application is made under sub-section (1) to the
Permanent Lok Adalat, no party to that application shall invoke jurisdiction of any court in the same dispute.
87
Section 22 C (1)

17
inherent jurisdiction to adjudicate or decide issues relating to the grant of permanent
injunction, declaration or fraud, even where the parties agree to submit to their jurisdiction.88

The Act lays down that where the dispute is brought before the Permanent Lok Adalat, the
parties thereto are barred from invoking the jurisdiction of the court of law in the same
dispute.89 Where a dispute is brought before it, the Permanent Lok Adalats are required to
deal with matters and decide such disputes by assisting the parties in their attempt to reach an
amicable settlement of the dispute in an independent and impartial manner.90

Where no settlement is arrived at, the Permanent Lok Adalat is empowered to decide the
dispute on merits.91 Although the provision is very unambiguous and clear in its terms, the
Supreme Court in Life Insurance Corporation v. Suresh Kumar92 held that the Permanent Lok
Adalat is not a regular court authorized to adjudicate the dispute between the parties on
merits. The Court mentioned further that the Permanent Lok Adalat had no jurisdiction or
authority vested in it to decide any ‘lis’ as such between the parties, even where the attempt
to arrive at an agreed settlement between the parties has failed.

Although no specific procedure is made out in the Legal Services Authorities Act, the latter
expressly lays down that the Permanent Lok Adalat while deciding the dispute on merits is
not bound by the Code of Civil Procedure 1908 and the Indian Evidence Act ,1872.93 This
provision which enables the Permanent Lok Adalats to determine the dispute in the event of
failure of settlement has a two- fold objective. In the first place, it would help to avoid a
protracted dispute which may have resulted in irretrievable damage to either party to the
dispute. Secondly, it indirectly would help reduce the burden on the regular courts and thus
enable the courts to concentrate on other cases requiring application of the mind. At the same
time, the tardy procedures followed in the courts of law would not be very suitable for the
adjudication of disputes relating to public utility services.

Besides being in consonance with the age-old adage, “prevention is always better than cure”,
the concept of Permanent Lok Adalats is clearly poor- friendly in as much as it allows a

88
Kanti Devi v. State of Bihar (AIR 2012 Patna 86). See also (NOC) 221 (P&H).
89
22 (2) (c).
90
Section 22-C (5)
91
Section 22-C (8). See also proviso to Section 22 C (1) The section does not provide for Permanent Lok Adalat
to have jurisdiction in respect of non-compoundable offences and in respect of matters where the property in
dispute exceeds twenty-five lakh rupees.
92
(2011)7 SCC491.
93
Section 22 -D.

18
person from the lowest level to get judicial relief and justice without much delay and
expense.94 Furthermore, the Permanent Lok Adalats are to be manned by a person who holds
or has held a judicial office of a District Judge or an Additional District Judge or has held
judicial office higher in rank than that of a District Judge , who shall be its Chairman, and
two other persons having adequate experience in public utility services, to be nominated by
the Central or State government on recommendation of the Central or State authority as the
case maybe.95 The legislative intent of having non-judicial members in a tribunal like the
Permanent Lok Adalat, according to the Supreme Court of India, “is to make sure that the
legal technicalities do not get paramount in conciliation or adjudicatory proceedings.”96

While conducting conciliation proceedings or deciding a dispute, the panel of the Permanent
Lok Adalat is required to be guided by the principles of natural justice, objectivity, fair play,
equity and other principles of justice.97 Thus, while bringing an end to lengthy proceedings
and giving a go-bye to the complexities of procedural laws, Permanent Lok Adalats also
ensure the independence and competency of the members forming it.

Finally, every award of the Permanent Lok Adalat should be made by a majority of the
persons constituting it.98 Where fears were expressed regarding the composition of the
Permanent Lok Adalat comprising of two non-judicial members, the Supreme Court dispelled
the fears observing in Bar Council of India v. Union of India99 , that even where the two non-
judicial members disagree with the judicial member in respect of a matter, that does not mean
that such majority decision lacks in fairness or sense of justice. Where an award was passed
by the Chairman sitting singly, the award of the Permanent Lok Adalat was held to be invalid
and liable to be set aside as it was in clear violation of statutory provisions.100 Moreover, an
award which is made either on merit or in terms of a settlement agreement, is final and
binding on all the parties and cannot be called into question in any original suit, application
or execution proceeding .101 As the award passed is final, there is no further need for

94
Agarwal B.D., New Road to Speedy Justice, Vol. V Issue 2, Nyaya Deep, April –June 2002, p. 16.
95
Sec. 22 B.
96
Bar Council of India v. Union of India (2012)8SCC243.
97
Ibid. Sec 22D.
98
Section22-E (3).
99
(2012) 8 SCC 243
100
Reliance General Insurance Company v. Subhash Gupta AIR 2013(NOC) 69(P &H).
101
Sec 22 E (1), (2).

19
reconsideration in panel or review.102 This aspect therefore brings an early end to the
proceedings.

Deemed to be a decree of the civil court, the Lok Adalat is empowered to transmit the award
made by it, to the Civil Court for execution.103 Thus the award of the Lok Adalat which has
the status of a decree of a civil court, being final and permanent, ensures that litigation among
the parties is ended within a reasonable span of time. Many fears with regard to the
Permanent Lok Adalats had been voiced through a writ petition, the Supreme Court of India
in S.N. Pandey v. Union of India,104 dismissed the petition and held that the said Amendment
to the Act was valid. The Court observed that the Permanent Lok Adalats introduced by
amendment to the LSA, were established for deciding disputes in which specified public
utility services are one of the parties involved, for decreasing workload in courts, and for the
purpose of ensuring that justice is available to litigant speedily and impartially.105

106
The Supreme Court reiterated in Bar Council of India v. Union of India , that the
establishment of PLA and conferring on them jurisdiction up to a specified pecuniary limit is
not anathema to the rule of law. Alternative institutional mechanisms for the adjudication of
disputes cannot be said to be contrary to the constitutional scheme or against the rule of law.
The Apex Court was clearly of the opinion that institutional mechanisms with adjudicatory
powers set up by law cannot be faulted on the ground of arbitrariness or irrationality where
the principles of natural justice are complied with. The Court also explained that no person
has a constitutional right to have the dispute adjudicated by means of a court only and if at all
a party to a dispute has a grievance against the award of the Permanent Lok Adalat, he can
always approach the High Court under its supervisory and extraordinary jurisdiction under
articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India.

In conclusion, it may be said that where disputes occur in respect of public utility services,
Permanent Lok Adalats are empowered to resolve such disputes at the earliest opportunity
before they are instituted before the court for adjudication. The establishment of Permanent
Lok Adalats has opened a single window and independent judicial redressal forum providing

102
Section 22-E (4).
103
Ibid. Sec 22E (4), (5).
104
Writ Petition (Civil) No.543/2002 decided on 28.10.2002 available at
http://judis.nic.in/supremecourt/imgs1.aspx?filename=39448. See also (2012) 8 SCC 261.
105
(2012) 8 SCC 261.
106
AIR 2012 SC 3246.

20
prospective litigants a scope for pre- litigation conciliation and settlement of cases.107 The
importance of the Permanent Lok Adalat lies in its ability to promote and protect the welfare
of consumers who are able to resolve their disputes with the Public Utility Services in a
straightforward and unsophisticated manner. As discussed, Lok Adalats in the country are
governed by the Legal Services Authorities Act, Rules, Regulations and Schemes made there
under. Lok Adalats in several States are also regulated by schemes drawn up by for the
purpose.108

Permanent Lok Adalat is a forum where disputes relating to public utility services are
resolved through pre- litigation conciliation and settlement. Section 22 A defines Permanent
Lok Adalat (PLA) and the work area of PLA. PLA has jurisdiction with the matters relating
to Public Utility Services as defined in Section 22 A(b) of Legal Services Authority Act,
1987 which include services such as transport service for the carriage of passengers or goods
by air, road or water; orpostal, telegraph or telephone service; or supply of power, light or
water to the public by any establishment; or system of public conservancy or sanitation; or
service in hospital or dispensary; or insurance service. Also, in New India Assurance Co. Ltd.
V Sabharathanam109 , Court held that the disputes relating to insurance business carried on by
Insurance Company was, public utility services‟ under the said section. Therefore any party
to a dispute whose subject matter relates to public utility services can make an application for
the settlement of dispute. But parties making an application should satisfy certain
requirements such as the matter being referred to PLA should not be already instituted before
the court, the matter should not be non-compoundable and the value of the property in dispute
should not exceed one lakh rupees.110 While arriving at a settlement under PLA the court
should look into the principles of natural justice, objectivity, fair play, equity and other
principles of justice.111 The Act empowers the court to make a settlement which will be
binding on the parties and award of such settlement will be deemed to be a decree of the Civil
Court and will be final. This power is authorized to PLA under Section 22-E of the Act.

107
Section 22-A LSA,1987.
108
The Lok Adalat Scheme was drawn up by the Central Authority in exercise of the powers conferred by
Section 4(b)of the Legal Services Authorities Act,1987 (No.39 of 1987) as amended. See Sarkar S.K.,
Law Relating to Lok Adalat and Legal Aid (First Edition, Reprint, Orient Publishing Company,
Allahabad,2006,) p.335.
109
AIR 2009 Ker 71
110
Section 22-C of Legal Services Authority Act, 1987
111
Section 22 D of Legal Services Authority Act, 1987

21
However, Permanent Lok Adalat is different from Lok Adalat. The major difference between
LA and PLA is when one of the parties to a dispute, pending before any Court and referred to
the regular Lok Adalat or a pre-litigation case, does not agree, the other party will be advised
to pursue his remedies by approaching a Civil Court but in the Permanent Lok Adalat for
Public Utility Services, even if one of the parties fail to reach an agreement during
conciliation proceedings, it may decide the dispute on merits u/sec.22C(8) of the LSA Act
and such a decision shall be final and binding on all the parties thereto and on persons
claiming under them u/sec.22 E (1) and shall not be called in question in any original suit,
application or execution proceeding as per Sec.22 E (4) of the Legal Services Authorites,
Act.112

In one hand where PLA has been effectively resolving the disputein a cost effective and
speedier manner, on the contrary it has been subjected to various criticisms. Firstly, the fact
that the PLA‟s resolve their dispute by adjudication instead of conciliation has been
criticized. The heading of Chapter VI-A itself clearly refers to Pre-Litigation Conciliation and
Settlement but PLA while deciding the dispute can come to a settlement even though the
parties have not agreed to it. Hence, if parties do not reach a settlement after conciliation then
PLA has power to decide the dispute without parties‟ agreement. Thus, PLA resolve the
dispute through binding arbitration rather than conciliation. Secondly, when deciding a matter
under PLA it is made clear under Section 22-D that the provisions of the Code of Civil
Procedure and the Indian Evidence Act will not apply. Unfortunately, the determination or
decisions so arrived by PLA can be in a arbitrary or summary manner.113 Thirdly, there is no
provision regarding the right to appeal against any award passed by the court. This was
challenged in Bar Council of India114case by the petitioner who pleaded to quash the
amendment as right to appeal against the order of Permanent Lok Adalat has been taken away
from the parties to the dispute. The court in this case held that a statute cannot be rendered
unconstitutional merely on the fact that no appeal is provided to an aggrieved party in a
particular statute.115 And lastly, composition and establishment of PLA has also been
subjected to criticism. Even though the Act requires the Lok Adalat panel to be composed of

112
Permanent Lok Adalat, Haryana State Legal Services Authority available at
http://hslsa.nic.in/Publications%20PDF/PLA.pdf, last visited on 9th October 2019
113
Justice K.A. Abdul Gafoor, The Concept of Permanent Lok Adalat and the Legal Services Authorities
Amendment Act, 2002Citeas:(2003)5SCC(Jour)33,available at
http://www.ebcindia.com/practicallawyer/index2.php?option=com_content&itemid=1&do_pdf=1&id=700
114
AIR 2012 SC 3246
115
Ibid

22
a judge, lawyer and social worker, this is rarely done. It is usually a single retired High Court
judge who decides the cases.116

Permanent Lok Adalat has been efficiently resolving the dispute with the objective of “equal
access to justice” to all citizens of India. The amendment made to the Act was significant
because it filled the lacuna of Lok Adalat and made the decisions of the court binding.
Disputes relating to public utility services need urgent attention because prolonged delay may
result in irretrievable damage to either party.117 PLA plays an important role in speedily
resolving the dispute as contrary to the slow procedures of judicial courts. The judgements
given by PLA should be clear and free from ambiguity, and should not generate further
litigation. Since the subject matter of the PLA relates only to public utility services this
makes PLA a specific court for specific matter. Thus, PLA disposes the matter efficiently and
speedly. However, PLA need to be reformed since there are few criticism such as settlements
can be arrived without parties consent and moreover there is no appeal to such decisions.
Permanent Lok Adalat has created a major impression of providing justice to both parties.
Further, in 2003, a set of rules was formed for the better functioning of the PLA118.

Jurisdiction and competency of Lok Adalat

The Legal Services Authorities Act also provides for the jurisdiction and competency of the
Lok Adalat.119 Accordingly, Lok Adalat are competent to decide any matter falling within
their respective jurisdictions, with the exclusion of those specifically barred under the Act
and the regulations.120 The Act has spared no efforts to ensure that the doors of justice are
thrown wide open, without geographical access, financial capacity and subject –matter
concerns posing as barriers to it. Indeed, for the purpose of giving effect to its noble
objectives,121 broad jurisdiction has been conferred on Lok Adalat to bring about a settlement
in respect of any case or matter before it. Disputes which are already pending before the

116
Scott Shackleford, Manoj Kumar Sinha, In the name of efficiency: The Role of Permanent Lok Adalat in the
Indian Justice system and power Infrastructure, available at http://ssrn.com/abstract=1395957last visited on 29 th
September, 2019
117
Supra note. 58
118
The Permanent Lok Adalat (other Terms and condition of chairman and other persons) Rules 2003, available
at http://legalservices.maharashtra.gov.in/Links/act_rules/rules_2003.pdf, last visited on 29 th September.
119
Section 19(5) specifies the jurisdiction and competency of the Lok Adalat. See also Regulations 9
and 10 of NALSA (Lok Adalat) Regulations, 2009.
120
Proviso to Section 19(5). See also Regulation 17(7) of NALSA (Lok Adalat) Regulations,2009.
121
Inexpensive, speedy, non-adversarial and participatory justice

23
court122 or which are falling within the jurisdiction of the court but are still not brought before
it123, can be brought before the Lok Adalat for settlement.124 Thus both pending and pre-
litigative matters can be brought for settlement before the Lok Adalat.

Scope and Ambit of Lok Adalat

Lok Adalat can settle cases brought directly to them125 or referred to them by the court. In
respect of the latter, where the dispute is pending before the court, the court126 is
empowered127 to refer the matter to the Lok Adalat for settlement either on the volition of
both the parties, or, on its own, or at the behest of one of the parties to the court.128 But in
case of the latter situation, the reference by the court is required to be done only after giving
the parties a reasonable opportunity to be heard.129

It is crystal clear from the section that a Lok Adalat has to take cognizance of a case only
when it is received by it from the court on a reference made to it under section 20(1); or when
the case has been referred to it by the concerned Authority or committee organizing the Lok
Adalat under section 20(2) and in no other manner. It follows there from, that the Lok Adalat
has no power to take cognizance of a case and decide it at the instance of any party thereto,
independently of the references specified in subsections (1) and (2) of section 20.130

It also follows from a reading of the section that Lok Adalat are not empowered to pass ex
parted awards, in the interest of justice. Consent and willingness of both the parties to submit
their dispute to the forum either as a reference from a court or directly, therefore, is the
131
primary prerequisite for reference and settlement by Lok Adalat. However, in both the
cases, the parties ought to be heard before such reference. In Kishan Rao v. Bidar District
Legal Services Authority132, the question raised before the Karnataka High Court was

122
Section 19(5) (I)
123
Section 19 (5) (ii)
124
Regulation 12 of NALSA (Lok Adalat) Regulations, 2009
125
Section 19(5) (ii) r/w section 20(2) and proviso thereto
126
‘Court’ under Legal Services Authorities Act means a civil, criminal, or revenue court and
includes any tribunal or any other authority constituted under any law for the time being in force to
exercise judicial or quasi-judicial functions.
127
Section 20 (1) LSA 1987.See also Regulation 10 NALSA (Lok Adalat) Regulations ,2009.
128
Section 20 (1) LSA 1987.See also Regulation 10 NALSA (Lok Adalat) Regulations ,2009.
129
Proviso to section 20(1).
130
Justice Narayana’s, Law Relating to, Lok Adalat, (Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987) (Third
Edition, Asia Law House, Hyderabad,2004) p.108.
131
Ibid. Section 20(2).
132
AIR 2001 Kar 407.

24
whether the Lok Adalat could pass a decree when all the parties had not appeared before the
Lok Adalat nor was notice issued to them. The Karnataka High Court interpreted Section
20(3) of the Legal Services Authorities Act to hold that all the parties to the suit must be
present if the compromise was to be a valid one. The impugned decree was struck down as
being a nullity by reason of violation of the principles of natural justice. In a similar vein, the
National Legal Service Authority Regulations, 2009, stipulate that the reference is to be made
to Lok Adalat only at the behest of the court under section 20 of the Legal Services
Authorities Act or Section 89 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908. Among the various
stipulations, the regulations caution against a mechanical reference of pending cases to Lok
Adalat.133 In its view a reference may be made only where the referring court is prima facie
satisfied that there are chances of settlement of the case through Lok Adalat and the case is
appropriate to be referred to Lok Adalat.134

Thus, as is clear from the unambiguous language used in the section, Lok Adalat can
entertain cases referred to them irrespective of their nature135 and irrespective of whether the
case is pending or not in the court. However, they have no jurisdiction with respect to serious
offences which are non – compoundable in nature. The upshot of the above provisions is that
Lok Adalat are empowered to settle various types of cases whether civil cases, revenue cases,
compoundable criminal cases, insurance cases, motor accident claims tribunal cases, land
acquisition cases, matrimonial136 and family disputes, bank loan cases, cases under Section
138 of Negotiable Instruments Act and several others.

Review of settlement provisions

The rationale behind Lok Adalat being, to provide equitable justice, Lok Adalat have to strive
to “arrive at a compromise or settlement” upon a reference of disputes made to them.137 In
doing so, they are required to act with utmost expedition and have to be guided by the
principles of justice, equity fair play and other legal principles. As rightly observed, “Lok
133
Regulation 10 (2) NALSA (Lok Adalat) Regulations ,2009
134
Divorce matters and criminal cases which are not compoundable under the Code of Criminal
Procedure, 1973 should not be referred.
135
Although the language of the section conferring competency on the Lok Adalat is wide,
nonetheless, in view of section 20(4), the Lok Adalat has to be guided not merely by the principles of
justice, equity and fair play but must also be guided by other legal principles.
136
Except matters relating to divorce.
137
Section 20(3): Where any case is referred to a Lok Adalat under sub-section (1) or where a
reference has been made to it under sub-section (2), the Lok Adalat shall proceed to dispose of the
case or matter and arrive at a compromise or settlement between the parties. See also Regulation 15
and 16 of the NALSA (Lok Adalat) Regulations),2009.

25
Adalat are morally bound to ensure that the settlements or compromises which form the basis
of their decision are founded on solid principles of justice.”138 This provision while giving
effect to the philosophy of Lok Adalat also ensures that the terms of settlement or
compromise by Lok Adalat are reached purely by the application of justice, equity, fair play
and other legal principles.

In the case of Union of India v. Ananta139, the Apex Court while clarifying the terms of
compromise and settlement, discussed the scope of Section 20(3) of the Legal Services
Authorities Act. It held that the specific language used in that section makes it clear that the
Lok Adalat can dispose of a matter either by way of a compromise or a settlement between
the parties. The Court went on to explain the significance of the terms “compromise” and
“settlement” used in the Act.140 It stated that a compromise involves the settlement of
differences by mutual concessions. Explaining the meaning of a compromise, the court
observed that a compromise is a mutual promise of two or more parties that are at
controversy. It is “an agreement between two or more persons, who, to avoid a law suit,
amicably settle their differences, on such terms as they can agree upon. The Court made it
clear that the word “compromise” implies some element of accommodation on each side but
does not imply a total surrender.

With regard to “settlement,” the court observed that a settlement is the termination of legal
proceedings by mutual consent. The Supreme Court in this case stressed that compromise and
settlement should be arrived at by disputants through the Lok Adalat, in which some element
of accommodation from both sides on the basis of mutual consent of the parties is evident.
Lastly, the court cautioned that where no compromise or settlement is or could be arrived at,
no order can be passed by the Lok Adalat.141 Thus in keeping with the law relating to Lok
Adalat , the Supreme Court has laid emphasis on a compromise or settlement between the
parties to enable Lok Adalat to perform their statutory functions, as otherwise ,there would be
a risk of Lok Adalat drifting away from the conciliatory philosophy underlying them and
embarking upon adjudication like the courts.

138
Ibid. See also Dr. Paranjape N.V., Studies in Jurisprudence and Legal Theory (Sixth Edition,
Central Law Agency, Allahabad,2011) p. 446.
139
AIR 2007 SC 1561
140
Section 20(3) and (5).
141
AIR 2007 SC 1561

26
The Supreme Court in B.P. Moideen Sevamandir and anr. v. A.M. Kutty Hassan142
suggested certain precautions to be observed by the Lok Adalat while attempting a settlement
between the parties. The Court was keen that courts should encourage litigants to settle
disputes in an amicable manner. The Court observed that there should be no pressure, force,
coercion, threat to litigants to settle disputes against the wishes.

The Court also expressed concern that different Lok Adalat followed different procedures
was of the view that the National Legal Services Authority as the apex body would have to
issue uniform guidelines for the effective functioning of Lok Adalat.143True to the spirit of
reconciliation underlying its philosophy, Lok Adalat are empowered to resolve disputes
where both the parties are amenable or agreeable to a compromise or settlement. The Legal
Services Authorities Act, directs that in matters of reference of disputes to it, the Lok Adalat
should comply with principles of natural justice. Thus, on the one hand, Lok Adalat ensure a
pathway to justice which is devoid of obstacles,144 and on the other, give a free hand145 to the
parties to exercise their choice with assistance from the Panel to settle the dispute. Moreover,
parties can directly interact with the judge, which is generally not possible in the courts.

A significant aspect also taken care by the Legal Services Act, 1987, is that on failure of the
Lok Adalat to make an award in the manner provided, on the ground that no compromise or
settlement could be arrived at between the parties in a case referred to it by the Court, the
record of the case has to be returned by it to the concerned Court for disposal, in accordance
with law.146

Where the Lok Adalat refers back the matter to the Court for failure of settlement, the court
has to proceed to deal with the case from the stage, which was reached before such
reference.147 Where no compromise is reached by the parties in a matter which has been
placed before the Lok Adalat directly without reference from a court, the Lok Adalat has to
advise the party to seek a remedy in a court .Advice regarding the availability of legal aid is

142
AIR 2008 SC (Supp)1123
143
The Supreme Court of India in Moideen Sevamandir v. A.M. Kutty Hassan, directed the National
Legal Services Authority to formulate uniform guidelines for the effective functioning of Lok
Adalat. Accordingly, the National Legal Services Authority (Lok Adalat) Regulations, 2009, were
made and notified in the Gazette of India on 20th October, 2009. This has brought a uniform pattern
for organizing and conducting of Lok Adalat in the country.
144
Supra. See Chapter I
145
Proviso to section 20 (1) directs that reference to the Lok Adalat shall be made only after giving a
reasonable opportunity of being heard to the parties.
146
Ibid S.20(5).
147
Ibid S.20(7).

27
to be given in appropriate cases.148 In the alternative, the Lok Adalat may advise the parties to
resort to other alternative dispute resolution techniques.149

Thus, care and caution are ensured that there is no denial of justice to the parties in the event
of a failure of compromise. Thus, unsuccessful proceedings before a Lok Adalat do not
preclude or jeopardize a litigant from approaching the court for resolution of their dispute. In
State of Punjab v. Jalour Singh150, the Supreme Court ruled that Lok Adalat do not have the
power to “hear” parties to adjudicate cases as a court does. It discusses the subject - matter
with the parties and persuades them to arrive at a just settlement. The terms “determination”
and “award” by the Lok Adalat specified in the Legal Services Authorities Act, does not
contemplate nor require an adjudicatory judicial determination, but a non - adjudicatory
determination based on a compromise or settlement, arrived at by the parties, with guidance
and assistance from the Lok Adalat. The Court went on to clarify that Lok Adalat should not
substitute regular courts for they are meant for conciliation alone.151

Expeditious disposal of cases

Lok Adalat provide an opportunity to parties to resolve their disputes amicably at the least
possible cost and within a reasonable period of time. According to the Legal Services
Authorities Act, where a reference of a dispute is made, the Lok Adalat are required to arrive
at a compromise or settlement with utmost expedition.152 In view of speedy disposal of cases
being one of the objectives of the Act, the Lok Adalat are required to settle cases promptly.
At the same time, although inexpensive and speedy justice through Lok Adalat is envisaged
under the Legal Services Authorities Act, sufficient caution is taken to ensure that “justice
hurried is not justice buried” in as much as the panel is required to be guided by principles of
justice, equity, fair play and other legal principles.153

148
S.20(6) Where no award is made by the Lok Adalat on the ground that no compromise or
settlement could be arrived at between the parties, in a matter referred to in sub-section (2), that Lok
Adalat shall advice the parties to seek remedy in a court
149
Regulation 19 of NALSA (Lok Adalat) Regulations,2009
150
AIR 2008 SC 1209.
151
Ibid AIR 2008 SC 1209
152
Section 20 (4) LSA: Every Lok Adalat shall, while determining any reference before it under this
Act, act with utmost expedition to arrive at a compromise or settlement between the parties and shall
be guided by the principles of justice, equity fair play and other legal principles.
153
Section 20(4)

28
Cases on the working of legal aid functionaries under the
legal services authority act, 1987.
Sr. Case Facts Decision
No
1. Sampurna Behrua v. Union The Constitution of The court has
of India [(2011) 9 SCC 801] India lays the requested the State
responsibility on Legal Services
the State to ensure Authorities to
that all the needs of coordinate with
children are met the respective
and that their basic Child Welfare
human rights are Department of the
fully protected. States to ensure
Other rights that the Juvenile
guaranteed by the Justice Boards and
Constitution, such Child Welfare
as right to live with Committees are
dignity, the right to established and
fair trial and to free are functional with
and compulsory the required
primary education facilities. Some
for children below recommendations
the age of 14 are were also put forth
also violated due to in order to ensure
the non- that the rights of
implementation of juvenile offenders
the said Act. The are not violated,
petition outlines a and to rehabilitate
detailed study in the offenders.
twelve states of They are: 1.That
India that is Police and
Punjab, Bihar, government
Orissa, Madhya officials ensure
Pradesh, Uttar the
Pradesh, Rajasthan, implementation of
West Bengal, the JJ Act in the
Maharashtra, respondent states
Manipur, Gujarat, 2.Officials who
Karnataka, and fail to implement
Uttaranchal. Also the Act should

29
 there were face due
complaints that in punishment
many districts 3.Mandatory
Child Welfare institutions be set
Committees were up, within the
not operational or specified time
functional and even frame 4.To
Juvenile Justice provide basic
Boards had not amenities in the
been constituted in homes to child
the manner offenders 5.
provided in the Respondent States
Act. The petition to involve reputed
has been filed NGOs in the
seeking issue of implementation of
appropriate the orders.
directions to the
Central
Government as
also to the Chief
Secretaries and
Director Generals
of Police and other
authorities of the
respondent States
to implement the
Juvenile Justice
(Care and
Protection of
Children) Act,
2000 in its true
letter and spirit.
The petition also
highlights the
provisions of the
Act which have not
been implemented
despite number of
years having
elapsed in the
process.
2 National Legal Services The petition had DIRECTIONS
Authority v. Union of India been filed in the AND

30
(2014) 5 SCC 438 Supreme Court of DECLARATION
India seeking the S: 1.Hijras,
recognition of the Eunuchs, apart
rights of from binary
Transgenders in the gender, be treated
light of the as “third gender”
traumatic for the purpose of
experiences faced safeguarding their
by the members of rights under Part
the TG community III of our
Constitution and
the laws made by
the Parliament and
the State
Legislature.
2.Transgender
persons’ right to
decide their self-
identified gender
is also upheld and
the Centre and
State
Governments are
directed to grant
legal recognition
of their gender
identity such as
male, female or as
third gender.
3.Centre and the
State
Governments
directed to take
steps to treat them
as socially and
educationally
backward classes
of citizens and
extend all kinds of
reservation in
cases of admission
in educational
institutions and

31
 for public
appointments.
4.Centre and State
Governments
should also take
15 steps for
framing various
social welfare
schemes for their
betterment.
5.Centre and State
Governments
should take steps
to create public
awareness so that
TGs will feel that
they are also part
and parcel of the
social life and be
not treated as
untouchables.
Centre and the
State
Governments
should also take
measures to regain
their respect and
place in the
society which
once they enjoyed
in our cultural and
social life.
3 Sugreev alias Jagdish and The application It was held that
Ors. v. Smt. Sushila Bai and filed by the the Respondent
plaintiff respondent was permitted to
Ors. [AIR 2003 Raj 149] under Order 33, sue as indigent
Rule 1 of Civil person and it
Procedure Code, meant that it was
1908 came to be only deferment of
allowed and was payment of Court
permitted to file fees. She has to
the suit as an make payment of
indigent person. Court fees at latter

32
 Against this order, stag. She has to
the revision was pay Court fees to
filed. Government
irrespective of her
success or failure
in litigation where
she has not been
granted free legal
services. Matter of
payment of Court
fees in sum and
substance was
matter between
litigant and State.
This revision
petition is not only
wholly
misconceived,
misplaced but an
abuse of the
process of the
Court also. Thus,
the Revision was
dismissed.
4 Kalaben Kalabhai Desai v. The revision It is unfortunate
Alabhai Karamshibhai application under that the
Section 115 of programme of free
Desai, AIR 2000 Guj 232 C.P.C. filed by the legal services is
(233): (2000) 4 Cur CC 419. wife against the not 51 successful
order of the learned to the extent to
Civil Court, what it should
Mahesana. Under have been because
the order, the of the
learned trial Court noncooperative
awarded the attitude of the
interim members of the
maintenance to the Bar. The judicial
wife petitioner and officers are also
her minor son, equally
towards the responsible for the
litigation expenses, non-availability of
certain amount has these benefits to
been has been this class of

33
 awarded. This is litigants. In each
challenged. case where a
woman or child is
a party, it is
equally a duty of
the judicial officer
concerned to let
them know that
they are entitled
for free legal aid.
5 Pyla Bangarraju v. Pyla Petitioner seeks to Since the
Venkata Ramakrisha and quash the respondent herein,
certificate for court is a member of the
Anr. [2010 (5) ALD728] fee exemption scheduled caste,
issued by the therefore, he was
Chairman, Mandal entitled to the
Legal Services benefit of free
Committee, legal services and
Kakinada, in also the court fee
favour of the exemption.
respondent. The
respondent has
filed a pauper to
permit him to sue
as an indigent
person, to declare
gift deed as void
and not valid and
to grant permanent
injunction.
6 Supreme Court Legal Aid It appears that It was directed
Committee v. Union Of India while the that in the States/
provisions of the Union Territories
& Ors. [(1998)5 SCC 762] Act except Chapter where the High
III have been Court Legal
extended to all the Services
States vide Committee has
Notification dated not been
November 9, 1995, constituted either
the provisions of because of the
Chapter III have absence of the
not been extended regulations or
to a number of even though the

34
 States and Union
regulations have
Territories for the
been made such
reason that for the
committee has not
purpose been of constituted,
extending the the concerned
provisions of
State Government/
Chapter III, it is
Union Territory
necessary that the
Administration
concerned State
shall frame the
Government/Union
regulations and
Territory constitute the
Administration
High Court Legal
should have framed
Service
the relevant rules
Committee within
under Section 28 of
a period of two
the Act. It has been
months. There are
stated that since
many States and
rules have not been
UTs where inspite
framed in certain
of the rules having
States/Unionbeen framed, steps
Territories,have not been
provisions of
taken to constitute
Chapter III have
the various
not been extended
committees as
there. given by the Act.
It was also
directed that the
States/ Union
Territories in
which the various
committees have
not been
constituted in
accordance with
the rules, had to
constitute the
various
committees under
the Act within a
period of two
months
7 LAXMI V. UNION OF Laxmi, whose face In this case, the
INDIA (Supreme Court) and other body court directed that

35
[(2014) 4 SCC 427] parts were the acid attack
disfigured in the victims shall be
acid attack, had a paid compensation
PIL in 2006. A of at least Rs. 3
minor then, Laxmi Lakhs by the
was attacked with concerned State
acid by three men Government/Unio
in New Delhi, as n Territory as the
she had refused to after care and
marry one of them. rehabilitation cost.
She had filed a PIL Of this amount, a
seeking for the sum of Rs. 1 lakh
framing of a new shall be paid to
law, or amendment such victim within
to the existing 15 days of
criminal laws, for occurrence of such
dealing with the incident to
offence, besides facilitate
asking for immediate
compensation. She medical attention
had also pleaded and expenses in
for a total ban on this regard. The
sale of acid, citing Chief Secretaries
increasing number of the States and
of incidents of such the Administrators
attacks on women of the Union
across the country. Territories shall
A direction was ensure compliance
given to the Home of the directions
Secretary, Ministry that have been
of Home Affairs issued in the
associating the judgement.
Secretary, Ministry Various other
of Chemical & important orders
Fertilizers to have also been
convene a meeting passed by the
of the Chief Court directing the
Secretaries/concern authorities formed
ed Secretaries of at various levels to
the State carry out a
Governments and specific task. One
the Administrators of them is the
of the Union order issued by

36
 Territories, inter the Supreme
alia, to discuss the Court on April 10,
following aspects: 2015, for the
 Enactment of enactment and
appropriate publicity of the
provision for Victim
effective regulation Compensation
of sale of acid in Scheme in
the States/Union concerned states
Territories  so as to provide
Measures for the relief and
proper treatment, rehabilitation to
after care and the victims.
rehabilitation of the
victims of acid
attack and needs of
acid attack victims,
 Compensation
payable to acid
victims by the
State/or creation of
some separate fund
for payment of
compensation to
the acid attack
victims.
8 SUO MOTO WRIT The Supreme The court opined
PETITION (Supreme Court) Court, based on the that the victim
[AIR 201 SC 2815, (2014) 4 news item should be given a
SCC 786] published in the compensation of
Business and at least Rs. 5 lakhs
Financial News for rehabilitation
dated 23.01.2014 by the State.
relating to the Respondent No. 1
gang-rape of a 20 (State of West
year old woman of Bengal through
Subalpur Village, Chief Secretary)
in the State of West was directed to
Bengal on the make a payment
orders of of Rs. 5 lakhs, in
community addition to the
panchayat as already sanctioned
punishment for amount of Rs.

37
having relationship 50,000, within one
with a man from a month. It was also
different clarified that
community, by an according to
order, took suo Section 357B, the
moto action and compensation
directed the payable by the
District Judge in State Government
the area to inspect under Section
the place of 357A shall be in
occurrence and addition to the
submit a report to payment of fine to
the Supreme Court the victim under
within a period of Section 326A or
one week from that Section 376D of
date. On perusal of the IPC.
the report, it was
found out that there
was no information
in the report as to
the steps taken by
the police against
the persons
concerned, directed
the Chief
Secretary, West
Bengal to submit a
detailed report in
this regard within a
period of two
weeks. Amicus
curiae was
thereafter
appointed, to assist
the court in this
matter. The main
issue being that
earlier, Section 357
ruled the field
which was not
mandatory in
nature and only the
offender can be

38
 directed to pay
compensation to
the victim under
this Section. But,
under the new
Section 357A, the
onus is put on the
District Legal
Service Authority
or State Legal
Service Authority
to determine the
quantum of
compensation in
each case.

Cases relating the working of Lok Adalats and Permanent

Lok Adalats:
S.N Case Name Facts Decision
o
1 State of Punjab v. The accident took The appeal was
Jalour Singh and others place on March 4, allowed. The Lok
[AIR 2008 SC 1209, 1997. Amarjit Kaur, Adalat exercised a
(2008) 2 SCC 660] aged about 32 years, power/jurisdiction not
died in the accident. vested in it. On the
Her husband and other hand, the High
minor son claimed Court twice refused to
compensation. The exercise the jurisdiction
Tribunal granted vested in it, thereby
compensation. denying justice and
Thereafter, the High driving the appellants
Court Lok Adalat to this Court If any
took up the appeal party wants to
on 3.8.2001. The challenge an award
parties were not based on settlement, it
present. Their can be done only by
counsel was filing a petition under
present. After Article 226 and/or
hearing them the Article 227 of the
Lok Adalat passed Constitution, that too
the following order. on very limited

39
The Lok Adalat had grounds. But where no
increased the compromise or
amount of settlement is signed by
compensation to the the parties and the
family of the order of the Lok Adalat
deceased and does not refer to any
ordered the settlement, but directs
respondents to pay the respondent to either
the said make payment if it
compensation agrees to the order, or
within 2 months of approach the High
the date of the Court for disposal of
order. The appeal on merits, if it
appellants, does not agree, is not
therefore, filed a an award of the Lok
petition under Adalat. The question of
Article 227 of the challenging such an
Constitution (Civil order in a petition
Revision Petition) under Article 227 does
challenging the not arise. As already
order of the Lok noticed, in such a
Adalat. The said situation, the High
petition was Court ought to have
rejected by another heard and disposed of
single Judge of the the appeal on merits.
High Court by an
order holding that it
is not maintainable.
The high Court
stated that nothing
has been pointed
out showing that
such a petition
under Article 227 of
the Constitution is
maintainable. Apart
from the fact that
the Lok Adalat has
granted time for
filing the objections
and the objections
have been
dismissed, the

40
 meager increase in
the amount of
compensation does
not warrant any
interference.
2 BAR Council of India v. Bar Council of The appeal was
Union of India [(2012) 8 India by means of dismissed. The court
SCC 243, AIR 2012 SC this writ petition found no merit in the
3246] under Article 32 of submission of the
the Constitution of petitioner that the
India has raised service provider may
challenge to the preempt the
vires of Sections consideration of a
22-A, 22- B, 22-C, dispute by a court or a
22-D and 22-E of forum under special
the Legal Services statute by approaching
Authorities Act, the Permanent Lok
1987 as inserted by Adalat established
the (Amendment) under Chapter VI-A of
Act, 2002. The the 1987 Act and, thus,
challenge is depriving the user or
principally on the consumer of such
ground that Sections public utility service of
22-A, 22-B, 22-C, an opportunity to have
22-D and 22-E are the dispute adjudicated
arbitrary per se; by a civil court or a
violative of Article forum created under
14 of the special statute. By not
Constitution of making applicable the
India and are Code of Civil
contrary to the rule Procedure and the
of law as they deny statutory provisions of
fair, unbiased and the Indian Evidence
even-handed justice Act, there is no
to all. Whether compromise on the
Section 22-A, 22- quality of
B, 22-C, 22-D and determination of
22-E introduced dispute since the
into the Act by the Permanent Lok Adalat
Amendment Act of has to be objective,
2002 are contrary to decide the dispute with
the Rule of Law? fairness and follow the
principles of natural

41
 justice. Sense of justice
and equity continue to
guide the Permanent
Lok Adalat while
conducting conciliation
proceedings or when
the conciliation
proceedings fail, in
deciding a dispute on
merit. With respect to
the fact that there is no
right to appeal, the
court held that it does
not render the
impugned provisions
unconstitutional. In the
first place, having
regard to the nature of
dispute upto a specific
pecuniary limit relating
to public utility service
and resolution of such
dispute by the
procedure provided in
Section 22-C(1) to 22-
C(8), it is important
that such dispute is
brought to an end at the
earliest and is not
prolonged
unnecessarily. If at all a
Party to the dispute has
a grievance against the
award, High Court can
always be approached
under its supervisory
and extraordinary
jurisdiction under
Articles 226 and 227 of
the Constitution of
India.
3 PT THOMAS v. Whether the award The award passed by
THOMAS JOB [(2005) 6 of lok adalat be the Lok Adalat is the

42
SCC 478, AIR 2005 SC equated as the decision of the court
3575] decree of Civil itself though arrived at
court or not? by the simpler method
of conciliation instead
of the process of
arguments in court. The
effect is the same. The
court referred to section
21 and 22 of the Legal
Services Authority Act,
1987 that talk about the
Award of Lok Adalats
and Powers of Lok
Adalats respectively.
Further, the court has
referred to Order 23
Rule 3 of Civil
Procedure Code that
provides for
compromise of suit
where it is proved to
the satisfaction of the
Court that a suit has
been adjusted wholly in
part by any lawful
agreement or
compromise, written
and signed by the
parties. The Court after
satisfying itself about
the settlement, it can
convert the settlement
into a judgment decree.
The court also opined
that the award of the
Lok Adalat is
fictionally deemed to
be decrees of Court and
therefore the courts
have all the powers in
relation thereto as it has
in relation to a decree
passed by itself. This

43
 includes the powers to
extend time in
appropriate cases.
4 Madhya Pradesh Legal Madhya Pradesh It was concluded that
Services Authority State Legal Services the parties had already
(MPSLSA) v. Prateek Authority, the settled the matter and
Jain and Another [(2014) appellant herein, the purpose of going to
10 SCC 690] has filed the instant the Lok Adalat was
appeal challenging only to have a rubber
the propriety of stamp of the Lok
orders of MP high Adalat in the form of
Court. Essentially its imprimatur thereto.
the lis was between Thus, no error was
respondent Nos. 1 found in the judgment
and 2. Respondent of the High Court. The
No.1 had filed a Court answering the
complaint under question held that even
Section 138 of the when a case is decided
Negotiable in Lok Adalat, the
Instruments Act, requirement of
1881 (hereinafter following the
referred to as the guidelines contained in
'Act') against Damodar S. Prabhu
respondent No.2. should normally not be
Matter reached dispensed with.
before the Therefore, in those
Additional Sessions matters where the case
Judge in the form of has to be decided/
criminal appeal. settled in the Lok
During the Adalat, if the Court
pendency of the finds that it is a result
appeal, the matter of positive attitude of
was settled between the parties, in such
the parties. On their appropriate cases, the
application, the Court can always
matter was referred reduce the costs by
to Mega Lok imposing minimal costs
Adalat. However, or even waive the
the concerned same. Normally, the
Presiding Officer in costs as specified in the
the Lok Adalat did guidelines laid down in
not give his the judgment of
imprimatur to the Damodar S. Prabhu has

44
 said settlement in to be imposed on the
the absence of accused persons while
deposit that is 15% permitting
of the cheque compounding. There
amount which is can be departure
necessary under the therefrom in a
guidelines issued by particular case, for
the Supreme Court good reasons to be
in the judgement of recorded in writing by
Damodar S. Prabhu the concerned Court. It
v. Sayed Babalal is for this reason that
[(2010) 5 SCC 663]. the Court mentioned
The costs so three objectives which
imposed had to be were sought to be
deposited with the achieved by framing
Legal Services those guidelines, as
Authority operating taken note of above. It
at the level of the has been made
Court before which abundantly clear that
compounding takes the concerned Court
place, but was not would be at liberty to
deposited. Against reduce the costs with
the order of regard to specific facts
Additional Sessions and circumstances of a
Judge, a writ case, while recording
petition was filed by reasons in writing for
respondent No.2 but such variance.
the same is also
dismissed by the
High Court,
accepting the view
taken by the
Additional Sessions
Judge. Whether
these guidelines in
the judgment of
Damodar S. Prabhu
are to be given a go
by when a case is
decided/ settled in
the Lok Adalat.
5 Abul Hassan and Whether there The misgivings of
National Legal Services should be a DDA and MTNL in

45
Authority v. Delhi permanent Lok regard to the setting up
Vidyut Board & Ors. Adalat to deal with of permanent Lok
[AIR 1999 DEL 88.] the matters Adalats thus, were
involving DVB, ignored and the court
MCD, NDMC, ordered for setting up
DDA, GIC, MTNL of permanent Lok
and various Adalat. It is also
departments of the directed that these Lok
Government. Adalats shall meet at
such intervals as may
be dictated by the
necessity to hold the
same according to the
workload. It was held
that it would be in the
interest of the citizens
of India that permanent
Lok Adalats are
established and held
continuously so that the
purpose for which the
Act was enacted could
be achieved. Unless
permanent and
continuous Lok Adalats
are set up, it may not be
possible to reduce the
pendency in courts. The
need to establish
permanent and
continuous Lok Adalat
and to resort to
alternative dispute
resolution mechanism
cannot be overlooked.
The Lok Adalat and
alternative dispute
resolution experiment
must succeed otherwise
the consequence for an
overburdened court
system would be
disastrous.

46
6 All Guwahati Educated The Member- The powers of the state
Unemployed Hawkers Secretary, Assam authority are totally
Association and etc. v. State Legal Services administrative in
All Guwahati Municipal Authority in nature. They have no
Corporation and Ors. pursuance of the nexus with the judicial
etc. (High Court Of provisions of powers vested in the
Gauhati) [2006 SCC Section 22B(1) of Lok Adalats. Hence,
OnLine Gau 18, AIR the Act issued neither the state
2006 Gau 132] notices to the writ authority, nor the
petitioners taking central authority is
cognizance of authorized by the law,
various complaints to nominate the
received by him member secretary to
from different invoke and exercise the
persons for powers of permanent
adjudication of the Lok Sabha in any
disputes raised in place, within the
accordance with the territorial limits of that
provisions of particular state.
Chapter VIA of the
Act. The orders
passed in different
cases have been
challenged in all
these writ petitions.
Precisely, different
Benches of this
Court presided over
by the learned
Single Judges
suspended the
operation of the
orders passed by the
Member-Secretary
pending disposal of
the writ petitions.
Whether the
Member Secretary,
Assam State Legal
Services Authority
is authorized under
the provisions of the
Legal Services

47
 Authorities Act,
1987, hereinafter
referred to as the
'Act', to invoke and
exercise the powers
vested with a
permanent Lok
Adalat under the
provisions of
Chapter VIA of the
Act?
7 KN Govindam Kutty This appeal raises It was held that
Menon v. CD Shaji an important considering the clear
[(2012) 2 SCC 51] question as to the and unambiguous
interpretation of language of Section 21
Section 21 of the of the Legal Services
Legal Services Authority Act, 1987,
Authorities Act, every award passed by
1987. The main the Lok Adalats would
question that was be treated as the a
posed for decree of a Civil Court,
consideration was and thus executable.
that when a criminal And that there was no
case is filed under such specific
Section 138 of the distinction between the
Negotiable reference made by civil
Instruments Act, or a criminal court.
1881 referred to by Thus, even if a matter
the Magistrate has been referred by a
Court to Lok Adalat criminal court under
is settled by the Section 138 of the N.I.
parties and an Act, the award passed
award is passed by the Lok Adalat
recording the based on a compromise
settlement, can it be has to be treated as a
considered as a decree capable of
decree of a civil execution by a civil
court and thus court.
executable?
8 State of Maharashtra v. State of Held: The Supreme
Manubhai Pragji Vashi Maharashtra Court upheld the
and others (1995) SCC 6, represented by the judgment and order of
730 Education the High Court of

48
 Department Bombay. Article 21
(appellant) filed read with Article 39A
SLP against the of the Constitution
Judgment and Order mandates or casts a
of the High Court of duty on the State to
Bombay. The afford grantin-aid to
prayer was that the recognised private law
benefit of colleges, similar to
pensioncum- other faculties, which
gratuity scheme qualify for the receipt
introduced by the of the grant. The
Government for all aforesaid duty cast on
teaching and non- the State cannot be
teaching staff in whittled down in any
colleges with manner, either by
faculties in pleading paucity of
specified fields funds or otherwise.
should be made This position was made
applicable to the clear. Government was
staff of the directed to extend the
nonGovernment grant-in- aid scheme to
Law Colleges too. all Government
The High Court recognised private law
held that the action colleges, on the same
of the Government criteria as such grants
is not extending the were being given to
grants-inaid, other faculties also.
afforded to faculties
like Arts, Science,
Commerce,
Engineering and
Medicine to
nonGovernment
recognized law
colleges is
discriminatory.
9 M.I. Ibrahim Kutty v. The bank is the Section 20(5) says that,
Indian Overseas Bank, plaintiff here and where Lok Adalat was
Maruthanvode Branch the defendant had not in position to arrive
[AIR 2005 Mad 335] borrowed a certain at compromise, it did
sum of money on not mean that whenever
Demand Promissory records were sent back
Notes and Deed of to Court, it would lead

49
 Hypothecation. the to an inference that
Defendant had also matter was unsettled. It
executed a Simple was matter of
Mortgage Deed in reasonableness and
respect of the experience that whether
properties, by case was settled or not,
deposit of Title case records had to be
Deeds. The bank necessarily sent back to
filed a suit against Courts concerned.
the defendant to However, suit was
claim that amount, dismissed for default,
which was referred same Subordinate
to Lok Adalat. Both Judges had referred to
the Plaintiff Bank case to Lok Adalat.
and the Defendant Sitting as Chairman of
had agreed for a Legal Services
compromise and the Committee, same
Award was passed. officer settled matter
The Defendant has and had also signed in
not acted as per the award. Again when suit
terms of the award, came up before Court,
the Plaintiff Bank same officer, had
has filed Execution dismissed suit for
Petition. default – probably, it
Subordinate Judge wasn’t brought to
held that, every notice of Court that suit
Award of Lok was settled in Lok
Adalat should be Adalat. Thus,
deemed to be Subordinate
Decree of Civil Judge/Executing Court
Court and had rightly referred to
executable and that Section 21 of Act in
subsequent holding that award had
dismissal of suit become final and it
would not prevail could not be
against award of challenged. Petition
Lok Adalat was dismissed.
10 Chaluvadi Murali The award passed The court held that
Krishna v. District Legal Lok Adalat was under section 19(5)(ii)
Service Authority, challenged on the and S. 20(2), the lok
Prakasam District, ground that the adalats are competent
Ongole [AIR 2013 AP Legal Services enough to deal with the
41] Authority is not pre-litigation cases.

50
 competent to deal Also, that these two
pre litigation case provisions confer
and it could not jurisdiction on the Lok
settle dispute, Adalats even without
unless the case has the reference of the
been referred to, by dispute by the court.
the court. Thus, the award so
made by the Lok
Adalat was held to be
valid and proper.
11 Jatavath Sali v. Mandal The revision It was held that the
Parishad Development petitioner is legal services authority
officer and another. questioning the established under the
[2006 (2) ALT 217] order made on the legal services authority
file of the Mandal act exercises the quasi
Legal Services judicial functions
Committee, where the disputed
Miryalaguda, questions of the facts
Nalgonda District, are involved in the case
wherein the petition and the committee
was closed as there opines that these
was an essential questions cannot be
question as regard resolved by the Lok
to the identity of the Adalats. In that case, it
a certain person and would be appropriate
it was difficult to for the parties to invoke
ascertain it before proper remedy instead
the Lok Adalat. of closing application
of referring matter.
12 Sreedharan T. and Ors. Petitioners were The various provisions
Vs. Sub Inspector of indicted in non- contained in the Act
Police and Anr. [2009 bailable offences make it clear that the
CriLJ 1249, ILR2009 (1) and approached the Lok Adalat has no
Kerala 111] Hon'ble High Court adjudicatory functions.
for anticipatory bail. It cannot pass any
It was contended by independent
them that they are verdict/order/award
innocent and they arrived at by any
were falsely decisionmaking
implicated. It was process. It can only
also pointed out persuade the parties to
they had the dispute, by any
approached the known methods of

51
Hon'ble High Court conciliation, mediation
earlier and the etc., and with utmost
Court had referred expedition, to arrive at
the anticipatory bail a compromise or
application to the settlement and
Lok Adalat. determine the case in
Petitioners did not accordance with the
prosecute the bilateral compromise or
application and settlement arrived at
Adalat closed the them. In doing so, it
petition as not shall be guided by the
pressed. The principles of justice,
learned Single equity, fair play and
Judge examined other legal principles.
whether the Court What is expected of by
can refer an the Lok Adalat is to
anticipatory bail incorporate the terms of
application to settlement or
Adalat, whether compromise arrived at
Lok Adalat can by the parties to the
dispose of the bail dispute, in the presence
application and of both parties in the
whether a case form of an Award and
involving a under their signature as
nonbailable offence well as the signature
can be referred to and seal of the judges
Adalat. It was held of the Lok Adalat. It is,
that court could in effect, more or less,
refer an anticipatory like a compromise
bail application to decree. No decision can
the Adalat, that Lok be taken by the lok
Adalat cannot Adalat unilaterally.
dispose of the But, many Lok Adalats
anticipatory bail are found to issue
application and that independent directions
case involving and orders, just as the
nonbailable offence courts do, after an
can be referred to independent,
the Lok Adalat. adjudicatory process.
This is totally contrary
to the scheme and
scope of the Act and it
is impermissible also.

52
13 State of Kerala and Anr. The writ petition An offence punishable
Vs. Ernakulam District was filed by the under Section 397 IPC
Legal Service Authority state of Kerala is not compoundable
and Ors. [AIR 2008 Ker challenging the under Section 320 of
70, ILR 2008 (1) Kerala direction issued in the Code of Criminal
119] the award passed by Procedure, 1973. In
the Lok Adalat, to terms of the proviso to
refer a crime under Section 19(5) of the
investigation for an Act, the Lok Adalath
offence punishable shall have no
under Section 397 jurisdiction in respect
IPC. The Lok of any case or matter
Adalat had passed regarding an offence
the award since the not compoundable
suit between the under any law meaning
debtor and creditor the Lok Adalath would
had been settled in have jurisdiction to
the Lok Adalath and determine and to arrive
since the crime at a compromise or
registered had settlement between the
allegedly been parties to a dispute in
committed during respect of a case
the course of pending before; or any
recovery of a matter which is falling
vehicle for the non- within the jurisdiction
repayment of a loan, of, and is not before,
which was the any court for which the
subject-matter of Lok Adalath is
the dispute in the organised; it shall not
suit. The learned have jurisdiction to
Single Judge held determine or to arrive
that the offence at a compromise or
under Section 397 is settlement regarding
noncompoundable any case or matter
and hence the Lok relating to an offence
Adalath cannot not compoundable
compromise or under law. Therefore, it
settle any case or is not permissible for
matter relating to an the Lok Adalath to
offence not enter into any
compoundable determination or to
under law. arrive at a compromise
or settlement in relation

53
 to a case or matter
regarding an offence
punishable under
Section 397 IPC, which
is a non-compoundable
one.
14 Dakshinanchal Vidyut Present Petition The provisions of Legal
Vitran Nigam Ltd. and filed against order Services Authorities
Others V. M/s. whereby Permanent Act, 1987 are meant for
Prakancha Metal Works Lok Adalat awarded different objective, i.e.,
Pvt. Ltd. [2012 (9) ADJ compensation to the for adjudication of
112, AIR 2012 All 176] Respondent on dispute by settlement.
account of illegal The provisions of Act,
disconnection of 1987 are not exclusive
electricity supply at but supplementary in
Respondent's nature. A reading of
premises. The Sections 19 and 20 of
permanent Lok Act, 1987 would show
Adalats would have that a matter shall be
the jurisdiction to referred to Lok Adalat
entertain the claims on an application filed
for mental torture or by one of the parties
harassment or not? under Section 19(5)(ii)
with the request that
such matter needs be
determined by Lok
Adalat but only when
an opportunity is
granted to other side of
being heard. In the
present case, it is not
the case of learned
counsel for the
petitioners that no such
opportunity was
granted or that when
the opportunity under
Section 20(1)(ii) was
granted they raised an
objection about lack of
jurisdiction of Lok
Adalat or for not
referring the matter for

54
 determination by Lok
Adalat. Once an
opportunity of hearing
was granted before
referring the matter to
Lok Adalat and
thereafter the matter
has been decided, the
petitioners cannot be
allowed to retract and
contend that Lok
Adalat has no
jurisdiction.
15 Amod Prasad Ram V. A conjoint reading of
The State of Jharkhand, Section 22 B and 22 D
Jharkhand State Legal indicates that the
Services Authority and Permanent Lok Adalats
District Legal Services means the chairman
Authority and the two members
[2007(2)BLJR2006, and it is only on the
[2007(3)JCR283(Jhr)]] filing of an application
by the party to the
dispute that the
Permanent Lok Adalat
will be conferred the
jurisdiction to deal with
the case.
16 Anita Chauhan V. State Petition by the The provisions under
of Haryana and Ors. petitioner for Section 22 c would
[(2003)133PLR185] staying the only be attracted to the
operation of the pre-litigation
order passed by the conciliation and would
Lok Adalat. Lok have no application to
Adalat the parties the disputes which are
could not arrive at a already pending in the
compromise or court and which have
settlement, and the been referred to the
matter was Lok Adalat by the
contested between Court.
the parties. And as
no compromise or
settlement could be
arrived at between

55
 the parties. It was
mandatory for the
Lok Adalat to return
the case to the
Hon'ble High Court
for proceeding
further in the matter
and deciding the
same on merits.
Reference in this
connection may be
made to the
provisions of
Section 20 (5) & (6)
of the Legal
Services Authorities
Act, 1987. The
petitioner contends
that the Lok Adalat
has no such power
either under the
provisions of the
Constitution or of
the 1987 Act.

Court-fees exemption in Lok Adalat

There is no court fee required for Lok Adalat154 and even if a case is filed in the regular court
with payment of court -fee, there is a provision for refund of the court- fee, where a matter
referred to the Lok Adalat has been compromised or settled.155 In S. Manila Panicker v. Tito
Abraham156, the Kerala High Court has held that where a dispute is settled upon a reference
either under section 20 of the Legal Services Authorities Act or under section 89 of the Code
of Civil Procedure157, it is section 21 of the Legal Services Authorities Act, which will

154
Disputes can be brought directly to the Lok Adalat instead of going to a regular court first.
155
Section 21(1) of LSA 1987 Every award of the Lok Adalat shall be deemed to be a decree of a
civil court or, as the case may be, an order of any other court and where a compromise or settlement
has been arrived at by a Lok Adalat in a case referred to it under sub-section (1) of section 20, the
court-fee paid in such case shall be refunded in the manner provided under the Court-fees Act, 1870
(7 of 1870).]
156
AIR 2012Kerala 51
157
Section 89of the Civil Procedure Code, inserted by Amendment Act, of 1999 states (1) Where it
appears to the court that there exist elements of a settlement which may be acceptable to the parties,
the court shall formulate the terms of settlement and give them to the parties for their observations

56
govern the question regarding the refund of court fee. The Court also mentioned that the
entire court fee would have to be refunded in the manner provided in the Central Court Fees
Act. Lok Adalat are therefore economically viable158 and are easily accessible even to the
disadvantaged sections of society. Lok Adalat therefore provide affordable justice.

Lok Adalat conferred powers of Civil Courts

For the purpose of carrying out their statutory duties, the Lok Adalats have the powers of the
civil courts in respect of summoning and examining witnesses, discovery of documents,
receiving evidence on affidavits and requisitioning public records.159 This provision explains
that Lok Adalats have the power to summon the parties or witnesses or examine them on
oath. Similarly, they can take evidence on oath or by affidavit and can summon any public
record or document related to the case. Lok Adalats are deemed to be a Civil Court for the
purpose of certain provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1973.

All the proceedings before the Lok Adalats are deemed to be judicial proceedings within the
meaning of certain provisions160 of the Indian Penal Code 1860. Legal Services Authorities
Act, 1987.

Status and impact of awards passed by Lok Adalats

The Act along with the Regulations specifies the manner of drawing up of the award and the
particulars it should contain, once the award is signed by the contesting parties and the
members of the Lok Adalat. The drawing up of the award is merely an administrative act by
incorporating the terms of the settlement.161

The significant aspect regarding awards by the Lok Adalat is that every award of the Lok
Adalat is deemed to be a decree of a Civil Court and as such it is executable by that court.162
Its status being as good as the decree of a court itself, the award of the Lok Adalat is equally
capable of execution through the legal process.

and after receiving the observations of the parties, the court may reformulate the terms of a possible
settlement and refer the same for- (a) arbitration; (b) conciliation; (c) Judicial settlement including
settlement through Lok Adalat; or (d) mediation.
158
There is no provision for payment of court fees for referring a matter to the Lok Adalat.
159
S.22(1) (a) Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987.
160
Sections 193, 219 and 228 of the IPC.
161
See Regulation 17(1) NALSA (Lok Adalat) Regulations,2009.
162
Section 21(1) of the Legal Services Authorities Act 1987.

57
The Legal Services Authorities Act has conferred a status on the award passed by the Lok
Adalat equal to that of the decree of a Civil Court. The Supreme Court in the case of P.T.
Thomas v. Thomas Job163, in keeping with legislative intent observed that the award passed
by the Lok Adalat is the decision of the Court itself though arrived at by a simpler method of
conciliation instead of the process of arguments in court. Holding that the award of the Lok
Adalat is fictionally deemed to be a decree of the Court the apex court was of the view that
the court would have all the powers in relation thereto as it has in relation to a decree passed
by itself and this power would include the power to extend time in appropriate cases.

In another case164, observing that the Legal Services Authorities Act does not make out any
distinction in reference to a Lok Adalat made by a civil court or a criminal court, tribunal,
family court, rent control court, consumer redressal forum, motor accident claims tribunal
and other forums of a similar nature , the Supreme Court in the landmark case of K.N.
Govind Kutty Menon v. C.D. Shaji165 held that there is no restriction on the power of the
Lok Adalat to pass an award based on the compromise arrived at between the parties in a case
referred to it by a criminal court under section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act and by
virtue of the deeming provision, the order of the criminal court has to be treated as a decree
capable of execution by a civil court. The Apex Court has therefore favourably regarded the
power of the Lok Adalat to pass an award which is deemed to be a decree capable of
execution, in cases falling under the Negotiable Instruments Act.

Another significant feature of the Lok Adalat award is that where a settlement is reached, the
award made is final and binding between the parties.166 The objective behind making the
award of the Lok Adalats final is that being a compromise, it involves the mutual consent of
both the parties. Since an award of the Lok Adalat is based on compromise or a settlement
between the parties, none of the parties are in a win or lose situation aware that the decision is
reached on consent of both and to their mutual satisfaction.

It is pertinent to note that the provision regarding the finality of the Lok Adalat award under
the Legal services Authorities Act, is effective as an estoppel on the parties, in the same
manner as a judgment, with the difference that the method adopted in the former is the
process of conciliation, instead of the adversarial procedure of courts.

163
AIR 2005 SC 3575
164
K.N. Govind Kutty Menon v. C.D. Shaji
165
AIR 2012 SC 719
166
Section 21(2)

58
Secondly, unlike the regular litigative process in which there is generally scope for appeal to
a higher court, the Act offers no provision for appeal from an award of the Lok Adalat.
Interestingly, in Punjab National Bank v. Lakshmi Chand Rai167, an appeal was filed
under section 96 of the Code of Civil Procedure against the award passed by the Lok Adalat.
In this case, the Madhya Pradesh High Court interpreting Section 21 (2), the Court held that
an appeal would not lie under section 96 of the CPC holding that the Lok Adalat is conducted
under an independent enactment which is the Legal Services Authorities Act and once the
award is made by it, the right of appeal shall be governed by that Act. The Court clarified the
matter by laying emphasis on section 25 of the Act which gives the Act over riding effect.
Viewed thus, the Court concluded that section 25 of the Act shall prevail in the matter of
filing an appeal and an appeal would thus not lie under the provision of the Code of Civil
Procedure,1908.

The above analysis drives home the point that the award being a compromise and final, it
cannot be challenged by invoking the remedy under Article 226 or 227 of the Constitution.168
However, the Courts seem to be open to the idea of an appeal in exceptional situations where
the award is passed by a Lok Adalat without jurisdiction or without a compromise between
the parties or in cases of impersonation or fraud.169

In consonance with the concept of access to justice a final disposal and solution to the dispute
is made possible through the mechanism of the Lok Adalat.

Procedural formalities
To approach the Lok Adalats for the purpose of dispute settlement, the parties in question
have only to comply with minimal procedural formalities laid down in the Act170.The Legal
Services Authorities Act stipulates not only the early settlement of the dispute171 but also its
easy settlement. With this objective, Lok Adalats are not bound to follow the procedural laws
in the assessment of the merits of the claim in proceedings before it. The Act also lays down
that every Lok Adalat is empowered to specify its own procedure for the determination of
any dispute coming before it.172 A flexible rather than a rigid procedure conducive to

167
AIR 2000 MP 301
168
There is no provision for appeal against the award of the Lok Adalat to the higher court. But see
NALSA Regulation 12(3) in case of awards in pre-litigation matters.
169
Chaluvadi Murali Krishna v. District Legal Services Authority AIR 2013 AP 41
170
Section 20(1) and (2).
171
S.20(4).
172
Section 22(2).

59
bringing about a settlement between the parties, is the hallmark of the institution of Lok
Adalats. Nonetheless, such procedural latitude would need to be exercised in accordance with
the principles of justice, equity, fair play and other legal principles outlined in the Act.173

The NALSA Regulations of 2009, make further stipulations regarding the procedure to be
followed in Lok Adalats emphasizing the conciliatory over judicial role of Lok Adalats in
accordance with the latter’s philosophy.174 There is also no room for the use of coercion or
pressure as a means to secure a compromise before the Lok Adalats. More importantly, the
regulations lay down that there should be a discussion of the subject matter with the parties
concerned.175

The Regulations also provide that the appearance of lawyers on behalf of the parties is not
barred. The only stipulation made in this regard is that lawyers should avoid wearing their
robes and bands during the proceedings before the Lok Adalat.

Nonetheless the Regulations also encourage and support the personal presence and
participation of the parties when their cases were taken up.176 Among the other miscellaneous
provisions, the Regulations stress the need for the maintenance of confidentiality in all
matters relating to the proceedings in the Lok Adalat, failing which the erring member is to
be removed from the panel of members.

Associating members of the legal profession, college students, social organizations,

charitable and philanthropic institutions in organizing the Lok Adalats is another of the goals
of the NALSA Regulations.177

From the analysis above it is evident that the Legal Services Authorities Act 1987, along with
the rules and regulations, endeavours to bring about an amicable settlement of disputes at no
expense and with the least amount of delay through the creation of Lok Adalats. It also
provides the framework for a participatory and inclusive justice system.

Natural Justice and Lok Adalats

The Constitution promises to every citizen justice free, fair and unbiased. Equal access to
judicial redress, which has also been reiterated in international conventions, is one of the

173
Section 22(4) of the Legal Services Authorities Act 1987.
174
Regulation 13 of NALSA (Lok Adalat) Regulations 2009
175
Regulation 13 (3) NALSA (Lok Adalat) Regulations 2009.
176
Regulation 23 of NALSA (Lok Adalat) Regulations ,2009.
177
Ibid.

60
pillars on which the rule of law stands. However, in reality access to justice is denied to the
socio economically weaker sections of society. As a result of the mounting backlogs in courts
and the protracted, dilatory tactics being used in litigation, it is only the affluent who
possessed the golden key to unlock the doors of justice Hence an alternative had to be found
to the traditional dilatory system of litigation in courts, and one such proposed solution was
the Lok Adalat. It was a system of inexpensive and expeditious resolution of disputes that did
not involve substantial questions of law, as it was based on compromise. The legislative
mandate for the creation of Lok Adalats was contained in the Legal Services Authorities Act,
1987. Chapter VI of the Act provides for setting up Lok Adalats. Lok Adalats have been set
up in several States of India where they have enabled the disposal of a large number of cases
in a relatively short period of time. Lok Adalats had been set up to provide speedy and
inexpensive justice to the poor. But subsequently a disquieting phenomenon began to be
observed the objective of the Lok Adalats is speedy justice. For this purpose, the Lok Adalats
have a simple, streamlined procedure. But it is still justice which must reign paramount. In a
classic case of throwing the baby out with the bath-water, it appears that justice has itself
fallen victim to the desire for a speedy resolution. Instead of engineering a genuine
compromise, in some cases, Lok Adalats have tried to force an adjudicatory decision upon
unwilling litigants. The right to a fair hearing, the rule of audi alteram partem, is one of the
basic principles of natural justice but in the name of expediency, this right has been denied to
the people. This opportunity of being heard is a necessary component of natural justice and
absence of a hearing vitiates the process, no actual or resultant prejudice needs to be proved.
This article shall evaluate the procedure followed in Lok Adalats with respect to the
determinants of natural justice. Natural justice is the natural sense of what is right and wrong
and is the term used to describe those principles which constitute the minimum requirement
of justice and without adherence to which, justice would be a travesty. There are no fixed
rules of natural justice, rather, the rules have to be moulded to fit the exigencies of the
situation. As has been observed by the Supreme Court in several cases such as D.K. Yadav v.
J.M.A. Industries Ltd. natural justice is essentially fair play in action. Lok Adalats have a
dual mandate firstly, to provide justice and secondly, to do so in an expedient and
inexpensive manner. Thus, Lok Adalats are entitled to follow a streamlined procedure. It is
an established principle of law that procedural rigour has to bow before substantive justice.
However, at the same time, those procedural safeguards that are meant to ensure a fair trial
cannot be done away with in the name of expediency. The task of the Lok Adalats is to
perform a balancing act between the competing requirements of procedural safeguards and

61
expediency. This article seeks to demonstrate that Lok Adalats have failed to achieve this
balance; natural justice has been sacrificed at the altar of expediency. Lok Adalats have broad
discretion while performing this balancing act. The Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987
does not lay down a detailed procedure to be followed by the Lok Adalats, rather it is left to
the discretion of the Lok Adalat and it is for the State Government to frame rules in this
regard. Lok Adalats, despite the nomenclature, are not adalats or courts. They do not follow
an adjudicatory mechanism, rather they are para-judicial institutions whose function is to
ensure that the parties to the dispute reach a settlement through compromise. Under Section
20 of the Act, a case may be referred to the Lok Adalat if both the parties make an application
for the same; or when one party makes an application, after a reasonable opportunity of being
heard is given to the other party. The Lok Adalat may take cognizance of the case both at pre-
litigation stages and while the case is pending. Once the Adalat has taken cognizance of a
matter, it shall proceed to dispose of the case or matter and arrive at a compromise or
settlement between the parties. The Lok Adalats are required to act with utmost expediency
to arrive at a compromise or settlement between the parties. The Adalat is not bound by the
Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 or the Evidence Act, 1872, rather it shall be guided by legal
principles and the principles of justice, equity and fair play. Where no award is made by the
Lok Adalat as no compromise or settlement could be arrived at, the records of the case shall
be returned to the court from which the reference originated. When the matter is in a pre-
litigation stage, if no compromise or settlement is arrived at, the parties will be advised to
approach a court. Thus, the basic principle is that a Lok Adalat cannot adjudicate on the
merits of a case, its decision can only be based on a compromise or settlement. The Lok
Adalat under Section 20 lays down certain conditions for cognizance of a matter by the Lok
Adalat. A Lok Adalat can take cognizance of a matter either on application by both, or one of
the parties or even suo motu if it is satisfied that elements of conciliation and settlement exist
in it. However, in all cases, it is obligatory that the other party should be given an opportunity
of being heard. Several cases have come up before the Court where there has been denial of a
reasonable opportunity of being heard. In Kishan Rao v. Bidar District Legal Services
Authority the question raised was whether the Lok Adalat could pass a decree when all the
parties had not appeared before the Lok Adalat nor had notice been issued to them. The
Karnataka High Court interpreted Section 20(3) of the Legal Services Authorities Act to hold
that all the parties to the suit must be present if the compromise was to be a valid one. Thus
the impugned decree was struck down as being a nullity by reason of violation of natural
justice. A similar fact situation arose in Moni Mathai v. Federal Bank Ltd. and Recovery

62
Officer, Debts Recovery Tribunal. The award of the Lok Adalat was given without issuing
a notice of hearing to the petitioners; the compromise deed on the basis of which the award
was given was not signed by the petitioners and this was a clear violation of the Kerala
Regulations. The High Court of Kerala struck down the award with the observation that: The
Lok Adalats are also bound to follow the principles of natural justice, equity, fair play and
other legal principles. The Lok Adalats shall also not forget that their duty is not to dispose of
cases somehow but settle cases amicably. The basis on which Lok Adalats have been set up is
settlement and compromise. But lately, there has been a trend towards Lok Adalats assuming
adjudicatory functions instead. While civil courts do have the power to suo motu refer a case
to the Lok Adalat if it appears that it is a fit case for settlement, it must be remembered that
the very purpose of Lok Adalats is to enable the parties to reach an amicable settlement. If
one of the parties had refused to submit to the jurisdiction of the Lok Adalats in the first
place, then compelling it to appear before the Adalat is unlikely to generate a compromise.
The decision of the Karnataka High Court in Commr. Karnataka State Public Instruction
(Education) v. Nirupadi Virbhadrappa Shiva Simpi is an instance where the decision of
the Lok Adalat was rendered a nullity due to violation of natural justice. In this case, the
Assistant Government Pleader, representing the State, had submitted that he had no authority
to enter into a settlement without previous sanction from the State. Ignoring the objection
made by the Pleader, the Karnataka High Court proceeded to hear the matter and pass an
order. The High Court observed that natural justice had been sacrificed at the altar of
expediency. Lok Adalats could only decide matters on a settlement or compromise and could
not force a decision on merits on an unwilling party. The impugned award of the Lok Adalat
was quashed and the matter referred to the civil court for adjudication. The dangers of the
uncanalised discretion given to Lok Adalats have been recognised by some States and
pursuant to Section 28 of the Legal Services Authorities Act, Regulations have been framed
in relation to the conduct of Lok Adalats. The Kerala Regulations, 1998, framed by the
Kerala Legal Services Authority (KELSA), provide a model of good practice. Regulation 28
makes it mandatory for notice to be issued to the parties in a dispute in order to enable them
to prepare their case. This embodies the right to a fair hearing. Regulation 31 explicitly lays
down that the Bench is to restrain itself to a conciliatory role and make efforts to bring about
a settlement without bringing about any kind of coercion, threat or undue influence,
allurement or misrepresentation. Under Regulation 33, the Bench is required to obtain the
signatures of the parties to the dispute, in addition to the signatures of the Members of the
Bench. This Regulation ensures that the parties are given adequate notice and are present

63
during the proceedings. The Kerala Regulations, 1998, have given statutory expression to the
principles of natural justice. Thus the uncanalised discretion of Lok Adalats has been cut
down and the chances of arbitrary use of power have been minimised. The framing of such
clear, categorical regulations is a laudable effort. It is desirable that such Regulations be
framed by the Central Legal Services Authority under Section 27 or the State Legal Services
Authority under Section 28 of the 1987 Act. Thus there is a clear need to restrain Lok Adalats
from assuming adjudicatory functions which they were not designed to perform in the first
place. Unfortunately though, the Legal Services Authorities (Amendment) Act, 2002 which
inserted a new Chapter VI-A into the Act appears to continue this trend. These amendments
provide for the establishment of Permanent Lok Adalats, which would be dealing with
disputes relating to Public Utility Services. In his speech introducing the Legal Services
Authorities (Amendment) Bill, 2002, in the Lok Sabha, the erstwhile Law Minister Mr Arun
Jaitley observed that a drawback of Lok Adalats is that they were designed to bring about
resolution of disputes only by conciliation, and when conciliation fails, the experiment does
not succeed. Thus, Section 22 C(8) gives the Bench the power to adjudicate the dispute,
provided a settlement cannot be reached. This is contrary to the very ethos of the institution
of Lok Adalats, which were envisaged as conciliatory mechanisms where the adversarial trial
system had no place. Lok Adalats are institutions built on the philosophy of compromise to
entrust them with adjudicatory functions that they are not designed to perform would create a
cure that is worse than the disease. There can be no justice without adherence to the
principles of natural justice and they cannot be ignored in the name of expediency.

64
 CONCLUSION
The major obstacle that lies in the development of India, as a country, is the irregular
distribution of wealth. Today, 80% of the wealth in India is possessed by 20% of the
population. And the remaining 80% of the populations remains disadvantaged as far as the
enforcement of their rights is concerned. Since, the majority of population survives in dearth
of monetary resources, they mostly are reluctant to approach the Court of Law for the
enforcement of their rights. This is why the concept of free legal aid was like a basic
necessity in India, to impart social justice to each and every individual, irrespective of any
discrimination. The judiciary in India has always played an active role when it came to the
interpretation of provisions concerning free legal aid and the approach has always been the
one that favored the weaker and the disadvantaged sections of the society. Justice P. N.
Bhagwati and Justice V. R. Krishna Iyer, were the first judges to concede PILs in court.
Filing a PIL is not as bulky as a standard lawful case; there have been occurrences when
letters and telegrams tended to the court have been taken up as PILs and heard them. This
was developed by the judiciary in the way it is now, so that the needs of the poor did not
remain unheard. Prior to the 1980s, just the distressed party could approach the courts for
equity. After the crisis period the high court connected with the general population,
formulating a methods for any individual of people in general (or a NGO) to approach the
court looking for legitimate cure in situations where the general population interest was in
question. This shows that the representation of people in the courts has been a prime concern
of the judiciary so that the ideals and goals laid down in the preamble could actually be there
in practice. The legislature has also been active in this regard. Article 39A of the Constitution
of India, was enacted so as to promote, protect and deliver social justice, by the way of law.
The idea of Public Interest Litigation (PIL) was developed in the same line of the progression
as in concern with the standards revered in Article 39A of the Constitution of India to secure
and convey brief social equity with the help of law. The Legal Services Authority Act, 1987
was brought into force with the main aim of providing a proper set of laws providing for the
establishment of the authorities that would deal exclusively with rendering free legal
assistance to the persons eligible under the act under Section 12. But the authorities so
formed, still face challenges which pose as obstacles in achieving the purpose for which the
law has been enacted. Even though the higher judiciary in India has also been active, but
some activity is also required on the part of subordinate Judiciary. The judges working at the
district court need to work on the individualistic approach. As even today people are reluctant

65
to approach courts. So this reluctance towards the legal process needs to be essentially
removed from within the people and the judges need to develop a more individualistic
approach rather than a collective one. The problem also majorly lies in the implementation
part of the act, where the Central and the State authorities need to be more active.

Some of the problems and suggestions are:

 It has to be ensured by the courts that the subordinate rules and regulations so formed in
under the Legal Services Authority Act, 1987 are duly implemented in all the States.

 Legal Awareness camps which the states generally fail to organize, must also be organized
at regular intervals and an inspecting authority must also be appointed to oversee the working
of the State authorities in this regard.

 The legal literacy material should also be properly and timely distribute to the participants.
This should be framed in the simplest possible manner and with least amount of legal jargon
so that it is easy to understand.

 The process of selection of the Panel Lawyers and Para Legal Volunteers often takes a lot
of time to be completed. This practice of procrastination causing unnecessary delay needs to
be dealt with.

 Preference should given to lawyers with experience on cases affecting persons provided

 There is many a times, dissatisfaction among the panel advocates who are appointed under
the act as the honorarium that they are supposed to receive as per the NALSA Regulations,
2010, is very low. Thus, they are often uninterested in the work that they have to do. And the
dues of the employees should also be timely paid, without any delay. Even though the
authorities are not working in the dearth of funds, but the rules are framed in such a way that
the members are only to be paid the remuneration which is very low.

 The panel advocates must also be given professional training on the laws concerning free
legal aid and the procedures followed in the courts.

 Para legal volunteers are also to be appointed under the act. But the training of such
volunteers is the main concern. There must be proper rules for the professional training and
the do’s and don’ts for them as they are supposed to bridge the gap between the community
and the Legal Services Authorities.

66
 There is no feedback mechanism as such provided in the Act. But it is advisable that there
should be one, so that the Legal Aid clients can share their experience, good or bad, as well
as their suggestions, if any. This would make general public feel important as their
suggestions would be taken into consideration for the better working of such institutions.

 The judges working at the subordinate courts are also under pressure to dispose more and
more cases to reach the targets set for them by the High Courts. In this situation the often fail
to realize that the parties may be unable to afford the legal services. So, such needs must be
realized by the Courts. And the quality of justice must not be compromised with, in order to
achieve the targets of the number of cases to be disposed. Certain amount of relaxation must
be given to the judges also, so that they give their 100% to the task assigned to them.

 Also that a judicial member has to be appointed as the main head of the Legal Services
Authority in a particular area and has to participate and supervise the working of such an
institution. So, in this, the duties of this member as a judge and his work gets greatly
jeopardized, as in addition to his judicial work, he now also has to do the administrative
work.

 The authorities must be able to realize and recognize the needs of every area where the
legal awareness camps are organized. And also the Lawyers and the Para Legals in such areas
must be appointed taking into consideration the needs of the people. Those Lawyers and the
Para Legals must be preferred who are specialized and have experience in the field of those
particular laws which are more in demand in the area concerned.

 Also, the NGOs and other voluntary organizations need to play a greater role, as they can,
in spreading awareness among general public, of such right and the relevant authorities. The
voluntary organizations need to be encouraged and as per the act, the state authority is
supposed to work in connection with the NGOs to spread the legal awareness. It is advisable
that there is an authority or a committee appointed to see whether the state authorities are
actually working with the NGOs or not and to advise both the organization to enhance their
working patterns for a greater good.

67
 “The LSAs should be the natural referral point for institutions/ organizations dealing with
the rights of the poor and the marginalised. NGOs working with these sections should be
encouraged to approach the LSAs for legal aid.”178

 The Monitoring mechanism of the Panel Lawyers and Para Legal Volunteers must be
worked upon to enhance its working and results.

178
http://www.undp.org/content/dam/india/docs/DG/needs-assessment-study-of-selected-legal-
servicesauthorities.pdf - accessed on 15 October 2019.

68
 BIBLIOGRAPHY
Websites:

 http://nalsa.gov.in/
 http://www.undp.org
 http://www.legalserviceindia.com
 http://www.ebcindia.com
 http://judis.nic.in/
 http://delhicourts.nic.in
 http://hslsa.nic.in
 http://pib.nic.in/

Acts:

 The National Legal Services Authority Rules, 1995.

 The National Legal Services Authority (Lok Adalat) Regulations, 2009.
 Legal Services Authorities (Amendment) Act, 1994.
 NALSA (Lok Adalat) Regulations, 2009.
 Goa State Legal Services Authority Rules, 1996.
 Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987.
 Code of Civil Procedure, 1908.
 The Indian Penal Code, 1860.
 Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.

Books and Papers:

 Dr. Paranjape N.V., Studies in Jurisprudence and Legal Theory (Sixth Edition,
Central Law Agency, Allahabad, 2011.
 Justice Narayana’s, Law Relating to, Lok Adalat, (Legal Services Authorities Act,
1987) (Third Edition, Asia Law House, Hyderabad,2004).
 Scott Shackleford, Manoj Kumar Sinha, In the name of efficiency: The Role of
Permanent Lok Adalat in the Indian Justice system and power Infrastructure.
 Justice K.A. Abdul Gafoor, The Concept of Permanent Lok Adalat and the Legal
Services Authorities Amendment Act, 2002.

69
 Sarkar S.K., Law Relating to Lok Adalat and Legal Aid (First Edition, Reprint, Orient
Publishing Company, Allahabad,2006).
 Agarwal B.D., New Road to Speedy Justice, Vol. V Issue 2, Nyaya Deep.
 Justice Jitendra N. Bhatt, A Round Table Justice Through Lok-Adalat (Peoples'
Court)— A Vibrant-ADR-In India.
 Karthyaeni.V and Vidhi Bhatt, Lok Adalats And Permanent Lok Adalats ,A Scope
For Judicial Review-A Critical Study.
 Justice P.S. Narayana, Law relating to Lok Adalats, Asia law house, 3rd ed. 2004.
 Justice Agarwal B.D., Transformation in trial system in India, Vol. VIII, Issue 1,
Nyaya Deep, January 2007.
 Professor Dr. Sharma S.S., Public Courts and Access to Justice, Civil and Military
Law Journal, Vol.43, Numbers 3 and 4, July – December 2007.
 Justice Gupta J.V., Lok Adalat and the Poor, Nyaya Path, December 2000, Year:1
Issue:4.
 Madhava Menon, N.R, “Lok Adalat: People’s Programme for Speedy Justice”,
(1986).
 Rayappa K.M. H., Lok Adalat: Objectives, Prerequisites, Strategies and Organization.
(1987).
 Murali Dhar, Law, Poverty, and Legal Aid: Access to Criminal Justice (Lexis Nexis,
Butterworths, New Delhi ,2004).

70