_________________________________________

ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE RESOLUTION

_________________________________________

_________________________________________

LOK ADALAT
_________________________________________

SUBMITTED BY: ANAKHA RAJEEV

IXth SEMESTER B.COM LL. B
ROLL NO: 9
REG NO: 47118551009
 Lok Adalat

Alternative Dispute Resolution

Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) is a term used to describe several different

modes of resolving legal disputes. It is experienced by the business world as well
as common men that it is impracticable for many individuals to file law suits and
get timely justice. The Courts are backlogged with dockets resulting in delay of
year or more for the parties to have their cases heard and decided. To solve this
problem of delayed justice ADR Mechanism has been developed in response
thereof. Alternative dispute redressal method is being increasingly acknowledged
in field of law and commercial sectors both at National and International levels.
Its diverse methods can help the parties to resolve their disputes at their own terms
cheaply and expeditiously. Alternative dispute redressal techniques are in
addition to the Courts in character. Alternative dispute redressal techniques can
be used in almost all contentious matters, which are capable of being resolved,
under law, by agreement between the parties. Alternative dispute redressal
techniques can be employed in several categories of disputes, especially civil,
commercial, industrial and family disputes. From the study of the different
alternative dispute redressal techniques in the proceedings chapters it is found
that, alternative dispute redressal methods offer the best solution in respect of
commercial disputes where the economic growth of the Country rests. The goal
of Alternative dispute redressal is enshrined in the Indian Constitution's preamble
itself, which enjoins the state: "to secure to all the citizens of India, justice-social,
economic and political liberty, equality and fraternity". The Law Commission of
India has maintained that, the reason judicial delay is not a lack of clear
procedural laws, but rather the imperfect execution, or even utter non observance,
thereof. The Law Commission of India in its 14th Report categorically stated that,
the delay results not from the procedure laid down by the legislations but by
reason of the non-observance of many of its important provisions particularly
those intended to expedite the disposal of proceedings. Given the huge number
of pending cases, the governance and administrative control over judicial
institutions through manual processes has become extremely difficult. The
Supreme Court made it clear that this stage of affair must be addressed: 'An
independent and efficient judicial system is one of the basic structures of our
constitution. It is our Constitutional obligation to ensure that the backlog of cases
is declared and efforts are made to increase the disposal of cases. "Wide range of
process are defined as alternative dispute redressal process often, dispute
resolution process that are alternative to the adjudication through Court
proceedings are referred to as alternative dispute resolution methods. These
methods usually involve a third party referred to as neutral, a skilled helper who
either assists the parties in a dispute or conflict to reach at a decision by agreement
or facilitates in arriving at a solution to the problem between the party to the
dispute. The alternative disputes resolution mechanism by the very methodology
used, it can preserve and enhance personal and business relationships that might
otherwise be damages by the adversarial process. It is also flexible because it
allows the contestants to choose procedures, which for the nature of the dispute
and the business context in which it occurs. The term "Alternative Disputes
Resolution" takes in its fold, various modes of settlement including, Lok Adalat,
arbitration, conciliation and Mediation. This technique of Alternative Disputes
Resolution has been used by many countries for effective disputes resolution. The
most common types of Alternative Disputes Resolution is Mediation. In, fact
mediation had been described by some as the most Appropriate Dispute
Resolution method. Mediation as a tool for dispute resolution is not a new
concept. To put it in simple terms, mediation is an amicable settlement of disputes
with the involvement of a neutral third party who acts as a facilitator and is called
a 'Mediator". ADR is usually less formal, less expensive and less time consuming
than regular trial. ADR can also give people more opportunity to determine when
and how their dispute will be resolved.

CONCEPTS OF ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE

RESOLUTION
ARBITRATION:
Arbitration, a form of alternative dispute resolution, is a technique for the
resolution of disputes outside the courts, where the parties to a dispute refer it to
one or more persons – arbitrators, by whose decision they agree to be bound. It is
a resolution technique in which a third party reviews the evidence in the case and
imposes a decision that is legally binding for both sides and enforceable. There
are limited rights of review and appeal of Arbitration awards. Arbitration is not
the same as judicial proceedings and Mediation. Arbitration can be either
voluntary or mandatory. Of course, mandatory Arbitration can only come from a
statute or from a contract that is voluntarily entered into, where the parties agree
to hold all existing or future disputes to arbitration, without necessarily knowing,
specifically, what disputes will ever occur.
CONCILIATION:
Conciliation is an alternative dispute resolution process whereby the parties to a
dispute use a conciliator, who meets with the parties separately in order to resolve
their differences. They do this by lowering tensions, improving communications,
interpreting issues, providing technical assistance, exploring potential solutions
and bring about a negotiated settlement. It differs from Arbitration in that.
Conciliation is a voluntary proceeding, where the parties involved are free to
agree and attempt to resolve their dispute by conciliation. The process is flexible,
allowing parties to define the time, structure and content of the conciliation
proceedings. These proceedings are rarely public. They are interest-based, as the
conciliator will when proposing a settlement, not only take into account the
parties' legal positions, but also their; commercial, financial and /or personal
interests. The terms conciliation and mediation are interchangeable in the Indian
context. Conciliation is a voluntary process whereby the conciliator, a trained and
qualified neutral, facilitates negotiations between disputing parties and assists
them in understanding their conflicts at issue and their interests in order to arrive
at a mutually acceptable agreement. Conciliation involves discussions among the
parties and the conciliator with an aim to explore sustainable and equitable
resolutions by targeting the existent issues involved in the dispute and creating
options for a settlement that are acceptable to all parties. The conciliator does not
decide for the parties, but strives to support them in generating options in order
to find a solution that is compatible to both parties. The process is risk free and
not binding on the parties till they arrive at and sign the agreement. Once a
solution is reached between the disputing parties before a conciliator, the
agreement will have the effect of an arbitration award and is legally tenable in
any court in the country.
MEDIATION:
Mediation settlement is a voluntary and informal process of resolution of
disputes. It is a simple, voluntary, party centred and structured negotiation
process, where a neutral third party assists the parties in amicably resolving their
disputes by using specified communication and negotiation techniques.
Mediation is a process where it is controlled by the parties themselves. The
mediator only acts as a facilitator in helping the parties to reach a negotiated
settlement of their dispute. The mediator makes no decisions and does not impose
his view of what a fair settlement should be. In the mediation process, each side
meets with an experienced neutral mediator. The session begins with each side
describing the problem and the resolution they desire – from their point of view.
Once each sides’ respective positions are aired, the mediator then separates them
into private rooms, beginning a process of “Caucus Meeting” and thereafter “joint
meetings with the parties”. The end product is the agreement of both the sides.
The mediator has no power to dictate his decision over the party. There is a win
– win situation in the mediation.
NEGOTIATION:
Negotiation can be defined as a bilateral or multilateral process in which parties
who differ over a particular issue attempt to reach agreement or compromise over
that issue through communication. Negotiation is about communication, which
entails dialogue, deliberation and round table conference with the aim of reaching
an agreement or settlement over a determined subject or object. Negotiation is a
voluntary ADR process. There is no third party to facilitate the resolution process
or impose a sentence. It is an act of goodwill through back and-forth
communication designed to reach an agreement between two or more parties with
some interests that are shared and others that may conflict or simply be different.

STRUCTURAL FRAMEWORK OF LOK ADALAT

NALSA along with other Legal Services Institutions conducts Lok Adalat’s. Lok
Adalat is one of the alternative dispute redressal mechanisms, it is a forum where
disputes/cases pending in the court of law or at pre-litigation stage are settled/
compromised amicably. Lok Adalat’s have been given statutory status under the
Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987. Under the said Act, the award (decision)
made by the Lok Adalat’s is deemed to be a decree of a civil court and is final
and binding on all parties and no appeal against such an award lies before any
court of law. If the parties are not satisfied with the award of the Lok Adalat
though there is no provision for an appeal against such an award, but they are free
to initiate litigation by approaching the court of appropriate jurisdiction by filing
a case by following the required procedure, in exercise of their right to litigate.
There is no court fee payable when a matter is filed in a Lok Adalat. If a matter
pending in the court of law is referred to the Lok Adalat and is settled
subsequently, the court fee originally paid in the court on the complaints/petition
is also refunded back to the parties. The persons deciding the cases in the Lok
Adalat’s are called the Members of the Lok Adalat’s, they have the role of
statutory conciliators only and do not have any judicial role; therefore, they can
only persuade the parties to come to a conclusion for settling the dispute outside
the court in the Lok Adalat and shall not pressurize or coerce any of the parties
to compromise or settle cases or matters either directly or indirectly. The Lok
Adalat shall not decide the matter so referred at its own instance, instead the same
would be decided on the basis of the compromise or settlement between the
parties. The members shall assist the parties in an independent and impartial
manner in their attempt to reach amicable settlement of their dispute.
Nature of Cases to be Referred to Lok Adalat
1. Any case pending before any court.
2. Any dispute which has not been brought before any court and is likely to be
filed before the court.
Provided that any matter relating to an offence not compoundable under the law
shall not be settled in Lok Adalat.
Which Lok Adalat to be Approached
As per section 18(1) of the Act, a Lok Adalat shall have jurisdiction to determine
and to arrive at a compromise or settlement between the parties to a dispute in
respect of -
(1) Any case pending before; or
(2) Any matter which is falling within the jurisdiction of, and is not brought
before, any court for which the Lok Adalat is organised.
Provided that the Lok Adalat shall have no jurisdiction in respect of matters
relating to divorce or matters relating to an offence not compoundable under any
law.
How to Get the Case Referred to the Lok Adalat for Settlement (A)
Case pending before the court.
(B) Any dispute at pre-litigative stage.
The State Legal Services Authority or District Legal Services Authority as the
case may be on receipt of an application from any one of the parties at a
prelitigation stage may refer such matter to the Lok Adalat for amicable
settlement of the dispute for which notice would then be issued to the other party.
Levels and Composition of Lok Adalat’s:
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.
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.
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.
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.
National Lok Adalat -
National Level Lok Adalat’s are held for at regular intervals where on a single
day Lok Adalat’s are held throughout the country, in all the courts right from the
Supreme Court till the Taluk Levels wherein cases are disposed of in huge
numbers. From February 2015, National Lok Adalat’s are being held on a specific
subject matter every month.
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
Adalat’s 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 Adalat’s is up to Rs. Ten Lakhs. Here if 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.
Mobile Lok Adalat’s 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 Adalat’s have been organized in
the country since its inception. More than 8.25 crore cases have been settled by
this mechanism so far.

PARTICIPATION IN LOK ADALAT SESSION

The District Legal Service Authority has conducted Lok Adalat on 26/06/2022 in
Trivandrum district. Adalat’s were conducted on the District and Sessions court
Trivandrum, Neyyattinkara court, Nedumangadu Court and Attingal Court. The
pending cases both civil as well as criminal which were eligible to be sent for Lok
Adalat process were referred to be settled through Lok Adalat.
In the District and Sessions court alone 13 booths were set up to settle the claims
referred by the court for mediation. My team was assigned to attend the Lok
Adalat organized on District and Sessions court Trivandrum. Our booth
consisted of one judicial officer as well as one member. The cases that were
referred to our booth were.
Case 1:PL NO 6650/2022
Petitioner: Valsala Kumari
Respondent: Krishnamma & Two others
The petitioner lent an amount of Rs 12 Lakhs to all the respondents in cash. The
respondents agreed to make the repayment within a time span of two and a half
years from the date of borrowing. The petitioner hasn’t received any interest from
the date of lending to the day till the day of Lok Adalat. The petitioner demanded
that she should be repaid the entire amount that the respondents borrowed with
interest till date. The respondents contended before the members of the Lok
Adalat that the interest rate put forward by the petitioner is a highly exorbitant
one and they are not presently in a position for repayment of such a lump sum.
At first the petitioner was highly reluctant as the respondents made it clear that
they couldn’t settle the entire amount with interest. As the Adalat proceeded
honourable principal and sessions judge as well as the chairman of the district
legal service authority Shri. P.V .Balakrishnan joined the members who were
present and he assured the plaintiff that the Lok Adalat is similar to judicial
proceedings and the award decided here will have the same effect as the decree
of a civil court and also made aware of the petitioner of the time and effort that
she will have to put in case the matter couldn’t be settled in the Adalat,
considering the age of the petitioner as well as the financial position of the
respondents the chairman suggested a more pragmatic approach by fixing an
amount and a time period that both the parties accepted. The dispute was settled
as the petitioner as well as respondents 2 ,3 & 5 were present and the settlement
could be reached among themselves. Respondent no.3 Rajesh Raj agrees to clear
of the amount due from the Respondent 2 and Respondent 5 and himself. Both
sides agrees that the entire amount of Rs 2 lakhs (Krishnamma) Rs 3 lakhs (Rajesh
Raj ) and Rs 5 lakhs (Girija kunjumol) can be settled in a full payment of Rs 12
lakhs. Accordingly, Respondent 3 Mr Rajesh Raj agrees to pay the amount in
following instalments to the petitioner. The first settlement of Rs 1.5 lakhs was
to be paid on or before September 30 of 2022.Thereafter the balance amount was
to be paid as quarterly instalment (every 4 months).

Case 2: PL No.7617/2022
Petitioner: S. Vinod
Respondent: Arayoor Service Co-operative Bank
The petitioner was denied by the bank from getting a loan from Arayoor service
co-operative bank, three different amounts were given as loan and the petitioner
didn’t repay any of the amount so borrowed from the bank. The petitioner
contended that the present loan was not availed by the petitioner as the loan was
taken by his father as it was his father’s liability to repay the loan and he didn’t
have any kind of liability in settling the loan amount indebted by his father. The
respondent contended that the petitioner is not eligible for a further loan from the
bank due to the three present loans the petitioner’s father owes to the bank and
hence was denied any loan. The petitioner further made clear that the loan availed
by his father didn’t incur him any liability and he, if given some more time will
be in a position to repay the entire amount for which he needed a renewed loan
from the bank. The petitioner was engaged in the business of real estate and he
incurred some loss in the business due to the pandemic and it became impossible
for him to overcome the financial crisis he got into without getting this loan
amount which he applied to the bank and was denied. The respondent denied his
eligibility on the sole ground of his father’s indebtedness towards the bank. After
a detailed discussion a mutual consensus was developed between the petitioner
as well as the respondent. The decision was, since both the petitioner as well as
the respondent was present, the respondent agreed to renew the present loan.
There were 3 loans, one of the loans was to be closed by the petitioner’s father
by paying an amount of Rs 20,000/-(Twenty Thousand only) within a time span
of one and a half month and in default the petitioner’s father shall pay Rs 33,000/-
(Thirty-Three Thousand only). Thereafter the petitioner’s loan was to be
renewed. A principal amount of Rs 30,000/- (Thirty Thousand Only) was to be
given after that. Hence the matter was settled accordingly.

Case 3: PL 4533/2022
Petitioner: Rakesh Sadashivan and others
Respondents: Ajith Kumar and others
This was a mass petition which was filed by 14 persons who were denied the
usage of amenities in the villament area of a combined villa- villament project.
The project was constructed on 46 acres of land and was divided between villa
and villament residents. The villament residents were denied from using
amenities like swimming pool, play grounds and so on. The petitioners who are
villament residents claim that even sharing the same compound they are being
treated unfairly and also the association for deciding matters relating to both the
villas as well as villament considered of representatives who are majority of villa
residents and there weren’t any sufficient representation from villament side
which was highly disproportionate .The villa residents who were the respondents
contended that the agreement which they signed before the proposed project was
constructed contained clauses that supports their actions and hence their action
were justifiable and the villament residents contentions cannot be dealt with. The
villament residents rejected this contention and stated that 46 residents were there
in villament project and none of their voices are heard at association meetings
and none or their demands are met with due to their low representation in the
association committee. The petitioners demanded to bring common amenities to
be used in a proportionate manner by both the villa as well as the villament
residents and there should be equal number representatives from both villa as well
as villament residents. The respondents opposed this by stating that it will be a
violation of the rules that the villa and the villament residents created for
facilitating the activities in the area and hence there was a problem with the rules
it is to be decided by a court of competent jurisdiction and the matter was referred
to the court.
Case 4: PL 5483/2021
Petitioner: Leelamma
Respondent: Secretary Pothencode Grama Panchayath
The petitioner was a school teacher by profession. The petitioner was working as
a teacher in Pothencode LP school and was removed from service by the
management. The petitioner contended that she was purposefully terminated from
service to appoint the relative of the panchayath president of Pothencode grama
panchayath. She also alleges that she was terminated from service just after the
government has increased the salary benefits for the teachers of the concerned
school. The secretary of the Pothencode grama panchayath is the respondent in
the present case and was present before the members for hearing and had denied
the contention of the petitioner by stating that there has not been any kind of
interference from the president’s side for the appointment of his relative and the
petitioner’s side is devoid of any merit. Both sides put forwarded their arguments
before the members and the petitioner bought into consideration of the board that
she was not given any kind of retirement benefits that she was entitled to and was
illegally removed from service, she emotionally stated that she didn’t have any
proper means to live now and take care of her sick husband.
As the proceedings progressed and after hearing both sides and all their arguments
the members suggested the panchayath secretary to consider giving her the
retirement benefits that she is entitled to, considering her financial position as she
couldn’t legally prove her termination was unlawful and on humanitarian
grounds. Both the parties agreed each other on the amount of settlement for which
the petitioner was entitled and the dispute was resolved accordingly.
Case 5: PL 6865/2022
Petitioner: Venakatachalam
Respondent: Dhanuraj
The petitioner was looking for a bride for his son. The respondent approached the
petitioner claiming to be a marriage broker and convinced him that he will help
the petitioner to find a bride for his son. The respondent helped the petitioner to
find a bride for his son and their marriage was fixed. Then one day the respondent
approached the petitioner that he needs some money urgently to help the bride’s
father who met with an accident and hence needed the money.
The petitioner gave the money to the respondent and after the marriage the
petitioner realised that the respondent borrowed from him more money than what
was required. The petitioner demanded the remaining amount to be repaid but
was denied. The board after hearing the matter referred the matter to a criminal
court as there is a clear offence of cheating.

INTERVIEW WITH ADVOCATE

After the session was over, we had a session with the advocate who was one of
the members and the discussion was on case PL NO 6650/2022 between Valsala
Kumari who is the petitioner and respondent Krishnamma & 2 others.

Student: Good Morning Ma’am.

Advocate: Good Morning. What do you think about the present case?
Student: Ma’am I believe that it is highly fortunate that we have such pre litigation
process existing.
Advocate: Yes indeed, due to this Lok Adalat session she could get the entire
amount back from the respondent parties.
Student: Of course, ma’am I do understand considering her age also the Lok
Adalat proceeding helped her a lot in finding a suitable remedy for the settlement
of the amount that the respondent owes her.
Advocate: Yes, we could help her to reach a more convenient settlement method
by explaining her the purpose of conducting the Adalat and the enforceability of
the settlement we reach here
Student: But ma’am I don’t think she doesn’t feel okay with this session when
this began, I felt that she had a feeling that civil proceedings through a court of
competent jurisdiction would be better. Why is that ma’am?
Advocate: Yes, what you observed is correct because people usually have no
awareness especially the commoners doesn’t have much knowledge on
alternative dispute resolution system and the purpose for which the settlement
machineries are constituted.
Student: But why is that ma’am these bodies are constituted for speedy disposal
of litigation and reducing the burden of the judiciary. Then why do people prefer
litigation processes that could last years?
Advocate: Indeed, you are right, consider this case as an example here the
petitioner wants to recover the entire amount from the respondents for which she
filed a suit for recovery of money in the subordinate judge’s court Trivandrum.
Here if the litigation proceedings were done in a normal manner, then it could
take years for a decree from the civil court. But here both the parties could hear
each other and with the aid and advice of the board they could reach a more
efficient settlement in a matter of hours. Also, the settlement agreement they sign
here will have the same enforceability as the decree of a civil court. The petitioner
is an old lady and considering her age and well-being this is the best option that
is available for her rather than spending years on expensive litigation
proceedings.
Student: You are correct ma’am if given proper awareness on settlement of issues
through alternative dispute redressal machinery it is possible that the burden of
cases on the shoulders of the court could be reduced and people can settle their
dispute without much delay and expenses.
Advocate: Yes, you are correct, as law students it is your duty to make people
aware of these settlement issues that’s available to them as Lok Adalat is court
referred there are other settlement proceedings like arbitration, conciliation,
mediation through which people can settle their civil disputes.
Student: Yes, ma’am I understand and I assure you that I will do my maximum
as a law student to make people aware of these settlement mechanisms available
for them which enables to settle their issues in a pocket friendly as well as in a
speedy manner.
Advocate: Good I wish you all the best for your future and may you succeed as a
good advocate.
Student: Thank you ma’am.

INTERVIEW WITH CLIENT

The participating students were given a chance to have a conversation with one
of the client Mrs Valsalakumari who is the petitioner in the case PL NO
6650/2022.
Student: Good morning, Mrs Valsalakumari.
Petitioner: Good morning.
Student: Are you satisfied with the settlement you reached here? Are there any
queries in your mind in which I can help you with?
Petitioner: Yes, I am satisfied with the settlement, but I do believe that I could’ve
got interest for the amount I advanced to the respondents if it was settled via court.
Student: See Mrs Valsalakumari consider your case being referred back to the
court for settlement. All the civil courts in this country are already overburdened
with a large number of pending litigations and it could take years for your issue
to get settled.
Petitioner: Yes, you are correct but if it was decided through a court, I could’ve
been awarded my entire amount with interest.
Student: See even if your case was referred back to court we cannot predict when
the case will be over and what will be the decision. In case the court didn’t decree
the way you intend? Then what will be your position all those years of legal fight
and the expense it caused you, will it come back?

Petitioner: No, it won’t.

Student: Yes, also we cannot be sure whether the court will grant you the interest
even though if it did it won’t benefit you because you will have to pay the
advocate his fees and other court expenses will have to be paid by you and also
you are a senior citizen it will become highly difficult for you to come each and
every day fixed for hearing. So, considering all these aspects both time as well as
money the settlement you reached here is the most suitable one and you’ve been
guided by eminent judicial faculties as well as advocates so you can keep your
tension aside.
Petitioner: But what if the respondent side fails to repay the entire amount agreed
within the stipulated period of time?
Student: See the settlement agreement you signed here will have the same effect
as that of the decree of a civil court and you can file an execution petition before
the civil court for the enforcement of the decree. So, you can keep you worries
aside. I hope I could give a satisfactory answer to your doubts are you satisfied?
Petitioner: Yes, indeed thank you for your valuable advise all these processes are
new to me that’s the reason I am having so much doubt on this settlement
proceeding.
Student: See Mrs Valsalakumari all these alternative dispute resolution systems
are enacted to provide speedy as well as for cost effective settlement of disputes
rather than entering into a lengthy litigation process. There is a saying that
“Justice Delayed Is Justice Denied”, hence to avoid delayed justice the alternative
dispute resolution system has been introduced and hence every person who has a
dispute which could be settled through alternative dispute resolution has an
opportunity to settle their matter before the litigation proceedings are initiated.
This enables the court to reduce pending disputes and the parties from getting
speedy remedy.
Petitioner: I understand now.
Student: I hope your mind is cleared of any more doubts or worries.
Petitioner: Yes indeed. Thank you for your valuable information that you shared
with me.
Student: It is my duty Mrs Valsalakumari as a student of law it is one of my moral
duties to clear your queries regarding this Adalat proceedings. Thank you for
spending your valuable time with me and sharing your queries with me so that I
could help you understand the purpose of this Lok Adalat.
Petitioner: Thank you.
Student: Thank you and have a nice day.