AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
This M.C.C. has been listed for orders on modification / correction in the judgment dated 24.06.2021 passed in F.A.No.162/2017 wherein due to
inadvertence, in page 4 of the judgment at para 6, the parties “Ashok Leyland Ltd. vs. State of T.N. and another†ought to have been shown in
place of the parties “Ramnik Vallabhdas Madhvani & Ors. Vs. Taraben Pravinlal Madhvani†and at last line in place of citation “(2004) 1
SCC 497†the citation “(2004) 3 SCC 1†ought to have been shown. Similarly, in page 10 of the judgment at para 12, the paragraph 7 quoted is
incomplete and has to be followed by a sub-para, i.e., sub-para 8, which is found to be missed. Likewise, in page 11 of the judgment at para 14, in
place of the words “(supra)â€, the words “reported in (2004) 1 SCC 497†ought to have been inserted.
The aforesaid errors in the judgment dated 24.06.2021 are apparent on the face of the record, and therefore, need to be corrected. It is made clear
that in page 4 of the judgment at para 6, the parties, “Ashok Leyland Ltd. vs. State of T.N. and another†shall be read in place of the parties
“Ramnik Vallabhdas Madhvani & Ors. Vs. Taraben Pravinlal Madhvani†and at last line in place of citation “(2004) 1 SCC 497†the citation
“(2004) 3 SCC 1†shall be read. Likewise, in page 10 of the judgment at para 12, after the paragraph 7 “sub-para 8†shall be read as under:
It is evident from the said provisions that the Lok Adalats have no adjudicatory or judicial functions. Their functions relate purely to conciliation. A
Lok Adalat determines a reference on the basis of a compromise or settlement between the parties at its instance, and put its seal of confirmation by
making an award in terms of the compromise or settlement. When the Lok Adalat is not able to arrive at a settlement or compromise, no award is
made and the case record is returned to the court from which the reference was received, for disposal in accordance with law. No Lok Adalat has
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. In their conciliatory role, the Lok Adalats are guided by principles of justice, equity, fair play. When the Legal Services Authorities Act
refers to 'determination' by the Lok Adalat and 'award' by the Lok Adalat, the said 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 'award' of the Lok Adalat does not mean any independent verdict or opinion arrived at by any decision-making process. The
making of the award is merely an administrative act of incorporating the terms of settlement or compromise agreed by parties in the presence of the
Lok Adalat, in the form of an executable order under the signature and seal of the Lok Adalat.â€
In page 11 of the judgment at para 14, in place of the words “( supra)â€, the words “reported in (2004) 1 SCC 497†shall be read.
Accordingly, the judgment is modified / corrected.
This order shall be treated as part of the judgment passed on 24.06.2021 in First Appeal No.162/2017 and the relevant portions, which have been
directed to be incorporated and/or deleted may be done in the said judgment.
With the aforesaid observation, the present M.C.C. stands disposed of.