J&K High Court Raises Concerns Over Improper Lok Adalat Award, Seeks Explanation From Judicial Officer

While setting aside the award passed by the forum Justice Sanjay Dhar ordered,

“.. it is directed that an explanation shall be called by the Registrar General from the concerned Judicial Officer and the Advocate who were members of the Lok Adalat for explaining their conduct. The response shall be placed before this Court for further directions”.

The dispute originated from a complaint filed under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, where the respondent alleged that cheques totaling ₹5 lakhs issued by the petitioner were dishonored. The trial court, after issuing non-bailable warrants for the petitioner's repeated non-appearance, referred the matter to the Lok Adalat, resulting in the impugned settlement.

The award passed by the Lok Adalat under the Tehsil Legal Services Committee, Tangmarg. mandated the petitioner to pay ₹1.50 lakhs to respondent Farooq Ahmad Lone. The settlement also stipulated severe consequences if the petitioner defaulted.

However, the petitioner challenged the award, contending that the Lok Adalat award was passed behind his back, and the signatures attributed to him and his counsel were forged. He also argued that neither he nor his authorized representative participated in the settlement proceedings.

Scrutinising the record extensively the court noted that the signatures on the Lok Adalat award starkly differed from those on other official documents, such as the vakalatnama and statements recorded under Section 242 CrPC.

“.. a settlement arrived at between the parties is to be reduced into writing and the same has to be signed by the parties or by their duly authorized agents/counsels. Unless the same is done, it cannot be stated that a legally enforceable settlement has been reached between the parties”, the court underscored.

However, in the instant case, the court ruled that the settlement, as recorded, was invalid and it had failed to meet the standards of legal sanctity.

Casting a shadow over the conduct of the Lok Adalat members, the court stated that the Lok Adalat which passed the impugned award was presided over by a Judicial Officer and an Advocate, both owe an explanation to the Court for the manner in which they have recorded the settlement.

The court review their response on 10 March 2025, to determine further action.

Case Title: Syed Tajamul Bashir Vs Farooq Ahmad Lone

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 5

Click Here To Read/Download Judgment