Lok Adalat Has No Power To Dismiss Cases for Non-Appearance Of Party: Jammu & Kashmir And Ladakh High Court

Justice Sanjay Dhar, while deciding a petition challenging an order of a Lok Adalat that dismissed a complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, observed that such action was beyond the purview of these alternative dispute resolution mechanisms.

The petitioner, Syed Tajamul Bashir, had approached the High Court challenging an order dated September 11, 2021, passed by a Lok Adalat constituted under the Legal Services Authority Act. Lok Adalat dismissed the petitioner's complaint against Mohammad Ayoub Khan for want of prosecution due to the petitioner's non-appearance.

The petitioner contended before the High Court that the Lok Adalat lacked the jurisdiction to dismiss a case for non-prosecution and that such an order was contrary to the provisions of the Legal Services Authority Act. The respondent, on the other hand, defended the Lok Adalat's order, arguing that it was within the powers of the Lok Adalat to dispose of a case in such a manner.

After a careful examination of the provisions of the Legal Services Authority Act, particularly Section 20, Justice Dhar concluded that the primary function of a Lok Adalat is to facilitate a compromise or settlement between the parties.

The Court observed,

"From an analysis of the provisions contained in Section 20 of the Act, which govern the manner in which a Lok Adalat has to function, there remains no manner of doubt that a Lok Adalat can pass an award only if the parties arrive at compromise or settlement. In case no such compromise or settlement is arrived at, the only option available with the Lok Adalat is to refer the case back to the concerned Court for its disposal under law. There is no power vested with the Lok Adalat to dismiss a case referred to it for non-prosecution if a party fails to appear before it."

The Court further emphasized that Lok Adalats are guided by the principles of justice, equity, and fair play, and their role is to assist in amicable resolution of disputes. Dismissing a case outright, without affording an opportunity to the parties to be heard, is contrary to these principles, the court underscored.

In view of the above, the High Court allowed the petition, set aside the impugned order of the Lok Adalat, and directed the original court to proceed with the case from the stage it was at before being referred to the Lok Adalat.

Case Title: SYED TAJAMUL BASHIR Vs MOHAMMAD AYOUB KHAN.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 235

Mr. Mir Umar, Advocate represented the petitioner, Mr. Tawheed Ahmad, Advocate represented the respondents.

Click Here To Read/Download Judgment