Pritam Singh vs Chairman, Tehsil Legal Services Committee, Basohli And Anr

Through the present petition filed under Section 104 and 103 of the Constitution of J&K State read with Article 227 and 226 of Constitution of India, petitioner seeks quashment of order dated 09.03.2019 passed by the Chairman, Tehsil Legal Services Committee,, Basohli by virtue of which petitioner has been directed to pay maintenance to the tune of Rs.14,000/- per month to his wife Asha Devi from the date of filing of the petition.

The grievance of the petitioner is that impugned order dated 09.03.2019, passed by the Lok Adalat is not according to the provisions of Regulation 17 of J&K State Legal Services Authority (Lok Adalats) Regulations, 2010, because this Regulation clearly provides that when both the parties in a case sign or affix their thumb impressions and the members of the Lok Adaklat countersign it, only then the award will become final. It is stated that in the present case, from bare perusal of the impugned award would reveal that there is no signatures of the parties as well as of their counsel.

The further grievance of the petitioner is that the impugned award has been passed in contravention of Regulation 6 and it does not disclose, who is a member and who has signed the impugned order/award.

I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and gone through the material on record.

From the perusal of the impugned order, it reveals that the petition under Section 488 Cr.P.C. filed by Asha Devi (wife of petitioner herein) was taken up in National Lok Adalat held on 09.03.2019 and this matter was decided and the impugned order came to be passed.

The impugned order dated 09.03.2019, reads as under:

"The instant petition is taken up today on 09-03-2019 in the National Lok Adalat in presence of petitioner and respondent, whereby the petitioner has compounded the petition U/s 488 Cr. P. C. with the respondent. In this respect, joint application has been moved by parties present in the National Lok Adalat. The statements of the parties to this effect have been recorded, the application be made part of the file. Since the petitioner has agreed to get maintenance to the tune of Rs. 14,000/- per month from the respondent from the date of filing of this petition as such the amount of interim application Rs. 5,000/- is enhanced to Rs.14,000/-per month. Any amount which earlier paid by the respondent to the petitioner shall be deducted. As such the compromised between the parties is accepted and file be consigned to record after its due completion."

Regulation 17 of J&K State Legal Services Authority (Lok Adalats) Regulations, 2010, reads as under:-

"17. Award.-(1) Drawing up of the award is merely an administrative act by incorporating the terms of settlement or compromise agreed by the parties under the guidance and assistance from Lok Adalat.

(2) When both parties sign or affix their thumb impression and the members of the Lok Adalat countersign it, it becomes an award (see a specimen at Appendix-I). Every award of the Lok Adalat shall be categorical and lucid and shall be written in Urdu or in English. It shall also contain particulars of the case, viz, case number, name of Court and names of parties, date of receipt, register number assigned to the case in the permanent register (maintained as provided under Regulation 22) and date of settlement. Wherever the parties are represented by counsel, they should also be required to sign the settlement or award before the members of the Lok Adalat affix their signature.

(3) In cases referred to Lok Adalat from a Court, it shall be mentioned in the award that the plaintiff or petitioner is entitled to refund of the court-fees remitted.

(4) Where the parties are not accompanied or represented by counsel, the members of the Lok Adalat shall also verify the identity of parties, before recording the settlement.

(5) Members of the Lok Adalat shall ensure that the parties affix their signatures only after fully understanding the terms of settlement arrived at and recorded. The members of the Lok Adalat shall also satisfy themselves about the following before affixing their signatures-

(a) that the terms of settlement are not unreasonable or illegal or one sided; and

(b) that the parties have entered into the settlement voluntarily and not on account of any threat, coercion or undue influence.

6) Members of the Lok Adalat should affix their signatures only in settlement reached before them and should avoid affixing signatures to settlement reached by the parties outside

the Lok Adalat with the assistance of some third parties, to ensure that the Lok Adalats are not used by unscrupulous parties to commit fraud, forgery, etc."

From bare perusal of the above said regulation, it is evident that for settlement of case in a Lok Adalat, both the parties have to sign or affix their thumb impressions and the member of the Lok Adalat has to countersign it, only thereafter it would become an award.

A bare perusal of the impugned order dated 09.03.2019 would reveal that although the impugned award does not bear the signatures of the parties, but it bears the signature of the Chairman, Tehsil Legal Services as well as signature of the other member JMIC, Basohli. The impugned award has been passed only after recording the statements of both the parties as well as their counsel on a separate paper, so I am of the view that mandatory provisions of Regulation 17of J&K State Legal Services Authority (Lok Adalats) Regulations, 2010 have been complied with. There is no ambiguity in the impugned award.

In case titled State of Punjab & Anr. Vs. Jalour Singh & Ors., reported in (2008) 2 SCC 660, a three judges bench of apex court has held as under:-

"12. It is true that where an award is made by Lok Adalat in terms of a settlement arrived at between the parties, (which is duly signed by parties and annexed to the award of the Lok Adalat), it becomes final and binding on the parties to the settlement and becomes executable as if it is a decree of a civil court, and no appeal lies against it to any court. If any party wants to challenge such an award based on settlement, it can be done only by filing a petition under Article 226 and/or Article 227 of the Constitution, that too on very limited grounds--------------------"

In view of above law, it is thus clear that settlement arrived between the parties should be signed by parties and can be annexed with award. In present case, as already held, Lok Adalat which was held on relevant date, recorded the settlement in the shape of statements of parties and also obtained the signatures of parties as well as their advocates and thereafter annexed the same with award. Therefore, there was sufficient compliance of law.

Another argument advanced by learned counsel for the petitioner is that Lok Adalat has erred in stating that maintenance to the tune of Rs. 14,000/- per month shall be payable from the date of filing of the petition. This argument also does not hold well, because in terms of Section 488 Cr.P.C. Court has power to grant maintenance from the date of filing of the application.

Section 488 of Code of Criminal Procedure, reads as under:-

"488. Order for maintenance of wives, children and parent. - (1) If any person having sufficient means neglects or refuses to maintain-

(a) his wife, unable to maintain herself, or

(b) his legitimate or illegitimate minor child, whether married or not, unable to maintain itself, or

(c) his legitimate or illegitimate child (not being a married daughter) who has attained majority, where such child is, by reason of any physical or mental abnormality or injury finable to maintain itself, or

(d) his father or mother, unable to maintain himself or herself, a Magistrate of the first class may, upon proof of such neglect or refusal, order such person to make a monthly allowance for the maintenance of his wife or such child, father or mother, at such monthly rate not exceeding two thousand rupees in the whole, as such Magistrate thinks fit, and to pay the same to such person as the Magistrate may from time to time direct :

Provided that the Magistrate may order the father of a minor female child referred to in clause (b) to make such allowance, until she attains her majority, if the Magistrate is satisfied that the husband of such minor female child, if married, is not possessed of sufficient means.

Explanation. - For the purpose of this Chapter, "minor" means a person who, under the provisions of the Majority Act, Svt.1977 is deemed not to have attained his majority

(2) Such allowance shall be payable from the date of the order, or if so ordered from the date of the application for maintenance.

(3-----------

(4)------

(5)---------------

(6)

(7) ----

(8) -------------"

From bare perusal of clause (2) of section 488 Cr.P.C, it is evident that maintenance can be granted from the date of application. When impugned award was passed by Lok Adalat counsel appearing for petitioner did not raise any objection, so it can be inferred that award has been passed with consent of parties. There is nothing in code, which authorize the court to give special reasons for granting maintenance from date of application. This is discretion of court which depends upon facts of each case. Further, bench of Lok Adalat is not required to pass award by giving detail reasons in the matter; his duty is only to pass award in consonance with statutory provisions of law on the subject. Section 488 Cr.P.C is social legislation meant for destitute wife, children and parents.

In view of above, this petition is dismissed.