ARBITRATION

Arbitration is an out of court procedure designed to resolve

disputes with one or more neutral third parties involves. Arbitration
utilizes rules of evidence and less formal procedures than what a trial
court would utilize, leading to a resolution that is usually much quicker
and more cost effective than taking a dispute resolution to court.
There are numerous different types of arbitration including binding
arbitration, non binding arbitration and hi-lo arbitration. With access
to information and resources about arbitration and arbitration law,
you can get the most out of an arbitration process, often allowing the
resolution to rule in your favor.

Arbitration is a legal mechanism used to resolve disputes through the

aid of a neutral third-party who is given the authority to make a legally
binding decision. The weight of this decision is what distinguishes
arbitration from mediation. The parties are not obligated to follow a
mediator's decision. In arbitration, both parties must agree to be
bound by the arbitrator's decision before entering into the
process. The arbitration process consists of written submissions from
each party and an evidentiary hearing to establish the facts of the
case. Arbitration can be either voluntary or mandatory and can be
either binding or non-binding.

WHY ARBITRATION???

There are many reasons as to why Arbitration is used. Initially

arbitration is regarded as a private procedure where the public cannot
gain access to any information that could at all affect either parties or
the arbitrator producing a safe and fair proceeding. In addition, as
1|Page
there are only three people involved the disagreement is resolved,
much quicker compared to the cases' that adopt the formal legal
proceedings as professional representation is not needed for this
reason business people are often in favor of the process. The
procedure of Arbitration is often cheaper as a result. Premium Nafta
Products v Fili Shipping [2007] UKHL 40. In cases such as Premium
NAFTA products v Fili Shipping 2007 The House of Lords commented
that if the parties are in a dispute that can be thought to be resolved
by the process of Arbitration then it should apparent that because of
its advantages over the official court proceeding. In order to establish
the dissimilarity between disputes that should be arbitrated and
which should not.

ADVANTAGES TO ARBITRATION:

1. More flexibility. In the case of arbitration, the parties have far more
flexibility to select what procedural and discovery rules will apply to
their dispute.

2. Select your own Arbitrator or Mediator. The parties can often select
the arbitrator or mediator that will hear their case, typically selecting
someone with expertise in the substantive field involved in the
dispute.

3. A jury is not involved. Juries are unpredictable and often damage

awards are based solely on whether they like the parties or are upset
at one party because of some piece of evidence such as a photo that

2|Page
inflames the passion of the jury. Juries have awarded claimants
damages that are well above what they would have received through
alternative dispute resolution; and they have also done the opposite.

4. Expenses are reduced. Attorneys and expert witnesses are very

expensive. Litigating a case can easily run into the tens of thousands
of dollars. Alternative dispute resolution offers the benefit of getting
the issue resolved quicker than would occur at trial – and that means
less fees incurred by all parties.

5. ADR is speedy. Trials are lengthy, and in many states and counties it
could take years to have a case heard by a judge or jury. Appeals can
then last months or years after that. In a matter of hours, an arbitrator
often can often hear a case that otherwise may take a week in court
to try with live witnesses.

6. The results can be kept confidential. The parties can agree that
information disclosed during negotiations or arbitration hearings
cannot be used later even if litigation ensues. The final outcome can
also be made private if the parties so stipulate and agree.

7. Party participation. ADR permits more participation by the litigants.

ADR allows the parties the opportunity to tell their side of the story
and have more control over the outcome than normal trials overseen
by a judge. Many parties desire the opportunity to speak their piece
and tell their side of the story in their own words rather than just
through counsel.

3|Page
 8. Fosters cooperation. ADR allows the parties to work together with
the neutral arbitrator or mediator to resolve the dispute and come to
a mutually acceptable remedy.

9. Less stress. ADR is often less stressful than expensive and lengthy
litigation. Most people have reported a high degree of satisfaction
with ADR.

Sample subject matters. Some examples of disputes that can be

settled by ADR include but are not limited to:

• Business disputes- contracts, partnerships, ownership

• Property / Land use disputes- property transfers, boundaries,
easements
• Family disputes- divorce, property, custody, visitation, support issues
• Consumer / Collection disputes- repairs, services, warranties, debts,
loans
• Employment disputes- employment contracts, terminations, non-
compete
• Landlord/tenant disputes- evictions, rent, repairs, security deposits
• Neighborhood disputes / Relational disputes or other civil or personal
conflicts
• Personal Injury disputes / Insurance disputes- accidents, coverage,
liability issues

4|Page
DISADVANTAGES OF ADR:

1. There is no guaranteed resolution. With the exception of

arbitration, alternative dispute resolution processes do not always
lead to a resolution. That means it is possible that you could invest the
time and money in trying to resolve the dispute out-of-court and still
end up having to proceed with litigation and trial before a judge or
jury.

2. Arbitration decisions are final. With very few exceptions, the

decision of a neutral arbitrator cannot be appealed, with fraud being
an obvious exception. Additionally, some states will not enforce
decisions of arbitrators that are patently unfair, a high standard to
meet. Another ground for setting aside an award is if the arbitrator’s
decision exceeded the scope of the arbitration clause or agreement.
Some arbitration clauses are broad, others are narrowly limited to
specific disputes. Decisions of a court, on the other hand, usually can
be appealed to an appellate court for a variety of legal grounds and
for numerous alleged procedural errors.

3. Limits on Arbitration Awards. Arbitrators can only resolve disputes

that involve money. They cannot issue orders compelling one party to
do something, or refrain from doing something (also known as
injunctions). For example, Arbitrators generally cannot change title to
real property. Of course this is subject to the specific language of the
arbitration clause.

5|Page
4. Discovery limitations. Some of the procedural safeguards designed
to protect parties in court may not be present in ADR, such as the
liberal discovery rules used in U.S. courts, which make it relatively easy
to obtain evidence from the other party in a lawsuit.

5. Fee for the Neutral. The neutral mediator or arbitrator charges a fee
for his or her services. Depending on the arbitrator or mediator
selected, the fees can be substantial (of course the parties typically
agree to divide the fees between themselves). Depending on the
contract language and state law, a prevailing party can be awarded
fees and costs. A judge on the other hand, charges no fees for his
services.

6. May have no choice. Often the contract in dispute contains a

broadly worded mandatory arbitration clause. Many lease
agreements and employment contracts, for example, contain
mandatory arbitration provisions, as do operating agreements and
other types of business contracts. Unless both parties waive
arbitration, most states will compel arbitration at the request of any
party.

7. Non-binding arbitration. Sometimes the court may order

nonbinding or Judicial Arbitration. This means that if a party is not
satisfied with the decision of the arbitrator, they can file a request for
trial with the court within a specified time period after the arbitration
award. Depending on the process ordered, if that party does not
receive a more favorable result at trial, they may have to pay a penalty
or fees to the other side.
6|Page
CONCILIATION:

Conciliation is an alternative dispute resolution (ADR) process

whereby the parties to a dispute use a conciliator, who meets with the
parties both separately and together in an attempt to resolve their
differences. They do this by lowering tensions, improving
communications, interpreting issues, encouraging parties to explore
potential solutions and assisting parties in finding a mutually
acceptable outcome.
Conciliation differs from arbitration in that the conciliation process, in
and of itself, has no legal standing, and the conciliator usually has no
authority to seek evidence or call witnesses, usually writes no
decision, and makes no award.
Conciliation differs from mediation in that in conciliation, often the
parties are in need of restoring or repairing a relationship, either
personal or business.

Key Differences Between Arbitration and Conciliation

The difference between arbitration and conciliation can be drawn
clearly on the following grounds:

• Arbitration refers to a method of resolving industrial disputes,

wherein the management and the labour present their
respective positions to the neutral third party, who takes a
decision and imposes it. Conciliation is a method of resolving the
dispute, wherein an independent person, who meet the parties
jointly and severally and helps them to arrive at negotiated
settlement or resolve their differences.
• The decision made by the arbitrator is acceptable to the parties
concerned. On the other hand, the conciliator does not have the
right to enforce his decision.

7|Page
 • Arbitration requires a prior agreement between parties known
as arbitration agreement, which must be in writing. As against
this, the process of conciliation doesn’t require any prior
agreement.
• Arbitration is available for the current and future disputes
whereas the conciliation can be adopted for existing disputes
only.
• Arbitration is like a courtroom proceeding, wherein witnesses,
evidence, cross-examination, transcripts and legal counsel are
used. On the contrary, Conciliation is an informal way of
resolving disputes between the management and labour.

LOK ADALAT

Lok Adalat, as the name suggest means People’s Court. ‘Lok’ stands
for People and the word ‘Adalat’ means Court. Lok Adalat is a special
kind of people’s court in which disputes solved by direct talks
between the litigants. The members of legal profession, college
students, social organisations, charitable and philanthropic
institutions and other similar organisations may be associated with
Lok Adalat.
Salient features of this dispute resolutions are participation,
accomadation, fairness, expectations, voluntariness, neighbourliness,
transparency and lack of animosity. Lok Adalat after studying the
case, try to solve the simple differences which otherwise are likely to
leave for reaching consequences through mutual understanding and
compromise.

The expression ‘Lok Adalat’ refers to a summary procedure for

disposal of cases pending in various courts through the process of
arbitration and settlement between the parties at the instance of the

8|Page
institution called Lok Adalat. Thus the expression Lok Adalat can be
used in the following two senses:
1. The process by which the cases pending in various courts are
settled with the consent of the parties in a summary way.
2. The institution which take initiative for arriving at a settlement of
the case.

By virtue of Sec.19 of the Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987, every

state authority, district authority, Supreme Court Legal Services
Committee or High Court Legal Services Committee or the Thaluk
Legal Service Committee may organise Lok Adalats for settlement of
cases pending in courts.

The Lok Adalat is presided over by a sitting or retired judicial officer

as a chairman, with two other members, usually a lawyer and a social
worker. There is no Court Fee. If the case is already filed in the
regular court the fee paid will be refunded if the dispute is settled at
the Lok Adalat. The procedural laws, and the Evidence Act are not
strictly followed while assessing the merits of the claim by the Lok
Adalat.

Main condition of the Lok Adalat is that both parties in dispute should
agree for settlement. The decision of Lok Adalat is binding on the
parties to the disputes and its order is capable of execution through
legal process. No appeal lies against the order of the Lok Adalat.

EVOLUTION

Summarily without too much emphasis on legal technicalities.

Alternate Dispute Resolution (ADR), has been an integral part of our
historical past.
The concept of Lok Adalat is an innovative Indian contribution to the

9|Page
world jurisprudence. Lok Adalat means peoples’ court. India as a long
tradition and history of such methods practiced in the society at
grass root level. These are called Panchayat and legally it’s called
arbitration. In Lok Adalat justice is dispensed

Ancient concept of settlement of dispute through mediation,

negotiation or through arbitral process known as ‘People’s court
verdict’ or decision of ‘Nyaya-Panch’ is conceptualised
instutionalised in the philosophy of Lok Adalat. The concept of Lok
Adalat was pushed back into oblivion in last few centuries before
independence and particularly during British regime.

Now this concept has been rejuvenated and became more popular
amongst litigants. Camps of Lok Adalat were initially started in
Gujarat in March 1982, and now it has been extended throughout
the country. The evolution of this movement was a part of the
strategy to relieve heavy burden on the Courts with pending cases
and to give relief to the litigants who were in the queue to get
justice. And the Legal Services Authorities Act 1987 gave a statutory
status to Lok Adalats pursuant to the Constitutional mandate in Art.
39-A of the Constitution of India, contains various provisions for
settlements of dispute through Lok Adalat.

LOK ADALAT- JUSTICE ON THE BASIS OF EQUAL OPPORTUNITY

The Constitution of India is the fundamental law of the land. Part IV

of the Constitution deals with Directive Principles of State Policy. By
virtue of Art.39-A the State is under a positive duty to secure that the
operation of the legal system promotes justice on the basis of equal
opportunity. The State shall also provide free legal aid to ensure that
opportunities for securing justice are not denied to any citizen by
reason of economic or other disabilities.

10 | P a g e
By virtue of Article: 21, “no person shall be deprived of his life or
personal liberty except according to procedure established by law”.

In HUSSAINARA KHATOON v. HOME SECRATERY, STATE OF BIHAR,

(AIR 1979 SC 1360), the Supreme Court held that “right to speedy
trial” is a fundamental right guaranteed under Art: 21 of the
Constitution. Justice delayed is justice denied. Speedy trial was held
to be the essence of criminal justice.

In SUK DAS v. UNION TERRITORY OF ARUNACHAL PRADESH (1986 5

SCC 401), the Supreme Court held that failure to provide free legal
aid to an accused at the cost of the State unless refused by the
accused would vitiate the trial. He need not apply for the same. Free
legal aid is at the State cost is a fundamental right of an accused
person under Art.21 of the Constitution.

A combined reading of Art.21 as interpreted by the Supreme Court of

India and Art.39-A of the Constitution establish beyond doubt that
speedy trial, free legal aid and equal opportunities for securing
justice are fundamental rights of citizen of India and a Constitutional
mandate which state has to follow in governance of this country. In
order to ensure these rights more effectively, the Parliament enacted
the Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987 to organise Lok Adalat to
secure that the operation of the legal system promotes justice on a
basis of equal opportunity.

COMPOSITION

The secretary of the high court legal services committee organising

the Lok Adalat shall constitute benches of the Lok Adalat. Each bench
shall comprise of two or three of the following:-

11 | P a g e
1. a sitting or retired judge of the high court
2. a serving or retired judicial officer
3. a member of the legal profession
4. a social worker.

The secretary of the district authority organising the Lok Adalat shall
constitute benches of the Lok Adalat. Each bench shall comprise of
two or three of the following:-

1. a sitting or retired judicial officer

2. a member of the legal profession
3. a social worker

The chairman of the taluk legal services committee organising the

Lok Adalat shall constitute benches of the Lok Adalat. Each bench
shall comprise of two or three of the following:-

1. a sitting or retired judicial officer

2. a member of the legal profession
3. a social worker

JURISDICTION:

Both civil and criminal cases which are pending before the courts can
be brought before the Lok Adalat for settlement and award.
However the Lok Adalat shall have no jurisdiction in respect of any
case or matter relating to an offence not compoundable under any
law.
A case pending in a court may be referred to Lok Adalat on an
agreement between parties or on an application made by one of the
parties to the court for referring the case to Lok Adalat for
settlement. So also the court can suo moto refer a pending case to

12 | P a g e
Lok Adalat.

When cases are referred to a Lok Adalat, it shall make sincere efforts
to bring about a conciliatory settlement in every case put before it
without bringing about any kind of coercion, threat or undue
influence, allurement of misrepresentation. Every Lok Adalat shall,
while determining any reference before it, act with at most
expedition to arrive at a compromise of settlement between the
parties and shall be guided by the principles of justice, equity, fair
play and other legal principles.

PROCEDURE OF LOK ADALAT:

The procedure followed at a Lok Adalat is very simple and shorn of

almost all legal formalism and rituals. The Lok Adalat is presided over
by a sitting or retired judicial officer as the chairman, with two other
members, usually a lawyer and a social worker.
It is revealed by experience that in Lok Adalat it is easier to settle
money claims since in most such cases the quantum alone may be in
dispute. Thus the motor accident compensation claim cases are
brought before the Lok Adalat and a number of cases were disposed
of in each Lok Adalat. One important condition is that both parties in
dispute should agree for settlement through Lok Adalat and abide by
its decision.
A Lok Adalat has the jurisdiction to settle, by way of effecting
compromise between the parties, any matter which may be pending
before any court, as well as matters at pre-litigative stage i.e.
disputes which have not yet been formally instituted in any court of
law. Such matters may be civil or criminal in nature, but any matter
relating to an offence not compoundable under any law cannot be

13 | P a g e
decided by the Lok Adalat even if the parties involved therein agree
to settle the same.
Lok Adalat can take cognizance of matters involving not only those
persons who are entitled to avail free legal services but of all other
persons also, be they women, men, or children and even institutions.
Anyone, or more of the parties to a dispute can move an application
to the court where their matter may be pending, or even at pre-
litigative stage, for such matter being taken up in the Lok Adalat
bench constituted for the purpose shall attempt to resolve the
dispute by helping the parties to arrive at an amicable solution and
once it is successful in doing so, the award passed by it shall be final
which has as much force as a decree of a civil court obtained after
due contest.

FINALITY OF LOK ADALAT AWARD:

One issue which raises head often is the finality of the award of the
Lok Adalat. During the Lok Adalat, the parties agree to abide by the
decision of the judge at the Lok Adalat. However, it is often seen that
later, the same order is challenged on several grounds. In one of the
recent decisions, the supreme court of India has once again laid to
rest all such doubts. In unequivocal terms, the court has held that
award of the Lok Adalat is as good as the decree of a court. The
award of the Lok Adalat is fictionally deemed to be decrees of court
and therefore the courts have all the powers in relation thereto as it
has in relation to a decree passed by itself. This includes the powers
to extend time in appropriate cases. The award passed by the Lok
Adalat is the decision of the court itself though arrived at by the
simpler method of conciliation instead of the process of arguments
in court.
Consent of parties: The most important factor to be considered while
deciding the cases at the Lok Adalat is the consent of both the
14 | P a g e
parties. It can not be forced on any party that the matter has to be
decided by the Lok Adalat. However, once the parties agree that the
matter has to be decided by the Lok Adalat, then any party cannot
walk away from the decision of the Lok Adalat. In several instances,
the supreme court has held that if there was no consent the award
of the Lok Adalat is not executable and also if the parties fail to agree
to get the dispute resolved through Lok Adalat, the regular litigation
process remains open for all contesting parties.
The Supreme Court has also held that compromise implies some
element of accommodation on each side; it is not apt to describe it
as total surrender.
A compromise is always bilateral and means mutual adjustment.
Settlement is termination of legal proceedings by mutual consent. If
no compromise or settlement is or could be arrived at, no order can
be passed by the Lok Adalat.

POWERS OF LOK ADALAT:

Lok Adalat has the same powers as those vested in a civil court under
the code of civil procedure, 1908 while trying a suit in respect of the
following matters, namely-
a) the summoning and enforcing the attendance of any witness and
examining him on oath,
b) the discovery and production of any document,
c) the reception of evidence on affidavits,
d) the requisitioning of any public record or document or copy of
such record or document from any court or office and
e) Such other matters as may be prescribed.

Every Lok Adalat shall have the requisite powers to specify its own
procedures for the determination of any dispute coming before it.

15 | P a g e
ADVANTAGES OF LOK ADALAT

The benefits that litigants derive through Lok Adalat are many,
1. There is no court fee and even if the case is already filed in the
regular court, the fee paid will be refunded if the dispute is settled at
the Lok Adalat.
2. There is no strict application of the procedural laws and the
Evidence Act while assessing the merits of the claim by the Lok
Adalat. The parties to the disputes though represented by their
Advocate can interact with the Lok Adalat judge directly and explain
their stands in the dispute and the reasons therefore, which is not
possible in a regular court of law.
3. Disputes can be brought before the Lok Adalat directly instead of
going to a regular court first and then to the Lok Adalat.
4. The decision of Lok Adalat is binding on the parties to the dispute
and its order is capable of execution through legal process. No
appeal lies against the order of the Lok Adalat whereas in regular
courts of law there is always a scope to appeal to the higher forum
on the decision of the trial court, which cause delay in the settlement
of dispute finally. The reason being that in a regular court, decision is
that of the court but in Lok Adalat it is mutual settlement and hence
no case for appeal will arise. In every respect the scheme of Lok
Adalat is a boon to the litigant public, where they can get their
disputes settled fast and free of cost.
5. Last but not the least, faster and inexpensive remedy with legal
status.

The scheme also helped the overburdened court to alleviate the

burden of arrears of cases and as the award becomes final and
binding upon both the parties, no appeal is filed in the Appellate
Court and, as such, the burden of the Appellate Court in hierarchy is
also reduced. The scheme is not only helpful to the parties but also
16 | P a g e
to the overburdened courts to achieve the constitutional goal of
speedy disposal of the cases.

PERMENENT LOK ADALAT

The Legal Service Authorities Act, 1987 provides for the conduct of
Lok Adalats. Lok Adalats can deal with pending cases which are
referred to it for determination. Lok Adalats are organised at regular
intervals. The Legal Services Authorities Act has been amended in
2002 with the object of establishing Permanent Lok Adalats.
Sec. 22 B of the Act provides for the establishment of the Permanent
Lok Adalats. The Central Authority or every State Authority shall, by
notification, establish Permanent Lok Adalats.
Every Lok Adalat established for an area shall consist of the following
persons:
1. A person who is, or has been a District Judge or Additional District
Judge or has been held judicial office higher in rank than that of a
District Judge. He shall be the Chairman of the Permanent Lok
Adalat.
2. Two persons having adequate experience in public utility service.
They are to be nominated by the Central or State government on the
recommendation of the Central or the State authority.

Any party to a dispute may, before the dispute is brought before any
court, make an application to the Permanent Lok Adalat for the
settlement of the dispute. The Permanent Lok Adalat shall not have
jurisdiction in respect of any matter relating to an offence not
compoundable under any law. It shall not have jurisdiction in the
matter where the value of the property in dispute which exceeds
rupees ten lacks.
After an application is made to the Permanent Lok Adalat a party to
that application shall not invoke jurisdiction of any court in the same

17 | P a g e
dispute.
When an application is made to the Permanent Lok Adalat, it shall
direct each party to file written statement stating the facts and
nature of dispute. After filing of written statement the Permanent
Lok Adalat shall conduct conciliation proceedings. The Permanent
Lok Adalat shall assist the parties to reach an amicable settlement of
dispute. If a settlement is arrived at, in the conciliation proceedings,
the Permanent Lok Adalat shall formulate a settlement agreement
and obtain signature on the settlement agreement and pass an
award in terms of that agreement. A copy of the award shall furnish
to each of the parties to the dispute. If the parties failed to reach an
agreement, the Permanent Lok Adalat shall decide the dispute. The
award of the Permanent Lok Adalat shall be final and binding on all
the parties thereon and on persons claiming under them. Every
award shall be deemed to be a decree of a Civil Court. The
Permanent Lok Adalat shall transmit any award made by it to a civil
court having local jurisdiction to execute the same.

NATURE OF CASES TAKEN UP BY LOK ADALATS

Since inception, the Lok Adalats have been instrumental in settling
disputes relating to several matters. The innumerable number of
cases dealt with by Lok Adalats seems to bewilder an outsider
studying the same. It is a misconception amongst many that the
nature of cases dealt with by the Lok Adalats are essentially petty
cases, while in reality, they are not so. Study reveals that a large
number of cases dealt with by Lok Adalats involve matters that are
hotly contested and are indeed fit for settlement through amicable
means such as negotiation. The ideal of the Lok Adalat is to attain
two basic objectives:
1) To resolve disputes that have not come to mainstream courts yet,

18 | P a g e
2) To resolve the disputes which have already come to the courts, by
negotiating with the assistance of an experienced member of the
team who functions as a conciliator.
At the outset, civil, revenue and criminal cases of compoundable
nature, were dealt with for settlement by the Lok Adalats. Success in
settlements encouraged settlements in other related fields, such as
Motor Accident Claims, mutation of lands, bonded labour,
matrimonial disputes and family disputes. In addition, a couple of
petty cases are also being taken up, which would have otherwise
taken several years to reach settlement. A few of these new disputes
are herein enunciated:

a) Motor Accident Claims:

While perusing the list of cases that come up before the Lok Adalats,
it stands clear that a large quantum of these cases are Motor
Accident Claims. Lok Adalats have a track record that speaks volumes
of successful settlement of cases, and of providing adequate
compensation to the victims of the road accidents within a
reasonable time-frame. Motor accident claims are presently on the
rise, particularly due to factors such as the growth of population and
industrial development. The use of more motor vehicles only creates
room for more accidents, which in turn, create more and more legal
disputes. According to the statistics of the Indian Road Congress,
India seems to stand at the fore with the largest number of road
accidents in the world. In the words of Justice Krishnaier, Indian
Roads have become death traps in recent times. The victims of the
accidents suffer not only physical and mental agony from the event,
but also from the legal consequences that ensue from the same.
Claims of such cadre consume about three or four years in the courts
and sometimes, the period is even more. With such large time gaps
the very purpose of legislation is certainly defeated because justice

19 | P a g e
delayed amounts to justice denied. Since the number of claims cases
is proportionately high and the technicalities and the procedure of
law is quite protracted, it certainly puts the claimants into
frustration. In such a situation, it is the Lok Adalats that have come
forward to take up these cases for an early settlement that would be
mutually beneficial to the claimants and the courts. Lok Adalats, all
over India have settled a record number of Motor Accident Claims.
Since the area of conflict in such cases involve only the quantum of
compensation, the Lok Adalats seem to be amicable forums for the
settlement of such issues. The expedience in these proceedings
ensure that the compensation is received by the victim within two or
three weeks of the determination.
b) Matrimonial Cases:
Another area where Lok Adalats have achieved a fair deal is the
settlement ofmatrimonial disputes. In solving matrimonial disputes,
it is found that the judges of the Lok Adalats persuade the parties to
re-unite and in case there is no chance of a reunion, and it is found
that a divorce by mutual consent is the only alternative, the judges
determine the amount that should be given to the wife as
maintenance allowance. Lok Adalats, in fact, help in bringing out an
early decision, where couples want to get a divorce easily, which
would otherwise be difficult and cumbersome in a proper court of
law.
c) Industrial Disputes:
The Lok Adalats have lately taken up industrial disputes and have
settled these cases with a fair amount of success. The industrial
disputes are settled either by organizing special sessions of Lok
Adalats or along with other cases in one session. Records reveal a
speedier disposal of industrial cases as opposed to the prevalent
track record for matters that come up before the Industrial Courts.

20 | P a g e
d) Land Acquisition Case:
Land acquisition claims have been a late entrant in the arena of the
Lok Adalats. A large number of land acquisition disputes relate to the
issues of patta, title and possession, as also compensation to be
provided in circumstances involving acquisition of land by
companies. Many disputes involve matters relating to the
ascertainment of compensation to be given in exchange for land
acquired, and involve an insight into who is to get the requisite
compensation.
e) Bank Cases
Recently, bank cases involving the repayment of loans taken by
people within a specified time period are being included within the
specified time period are being included under the jurisdiction of Lok
Adalats. Instead of filing suits in the courts of law, where the process
takes a long time to solve the case, banks prefer to take the cases to
Lok Adalats, where the representatives of the banks and the
borrowers come to the venue of Lok Adalats on the particular day. A
sum is affixed, that is neither high for the borrower, nor low for the
lender, but mutually acceptable.
f) Petty Offences:
Petty offences mean any offences punishable only with fines not
exceeding one thousand rupees, but do not include any offences so
punishable under the Motor Vehicle Act, 1939, or any other law
which provides for convicting the accused person in his absence or a
plea of quantity. For instance, not wearing helmets while driving two
wheelers, dumping garbage at public places and on roads, non-
submission of annual records of factories under labour act and any
fault in weighing machines according to the weight and measures
department are punishable under law. In cases of petty offences, the
accused does not often turn up on the specific date before the court
despite notices. This causes a delay in cases. In Lok Adalats, cases are
21 | P a g e
solved in an amicable manner. The accused pays the fine and the
case gets solved, thereby reducing the burden of arrears of cases on
the court. Lok Adalats settle all kinds of matters. However, as a
matter of policy, it is found that socio-economic offences have been
kept out of the purview of Lok Adalats.

22 | P a g e
 CASE NO: 1

PETITIONER: Thiru. P. Arul

RESPONDENT: 1. Kowsalya Ammal (died)

2. Balaji
3. Malathi
4. Umadevi
5. Revathi
6. Komathi
7. Saravanan
8. Manivanan

CATEGORY OF CASE: Original Suit

CASE NUMBER: 1. O.S. No: 116/2009

2. Lok Adalat Case No: 163/2017

JURISDICTION: As per the Legal Service Authority Act, 1987

this case is suitable to try its proceedings in Lok Adalat.

DATE OF PASSING AWARD: 11/03/2017

23 | P a g e
FACTS OF THE CASE:
The dispute between the plaintiff and the defendant was
settled by the village elders and well wishers of both the
families. Then the defendant 2 to 8 have jointly agreed to pay
a sum of Rs.4,00,000/- (Rupees Four Lakhs Only) to the
plaintiff Arul.
AWARD:
The defendant paid a sum of Rs. 4,00,000 to the plaintiff
before the Lok Adalat. Hence the case is disposed off as settled
before the Lok Adalat.

24 | P a g e
25 | P a g e
 CASE NO: 2
PETITIONER: M. Kannaiya Naidu
RESPONDENT: 1. Satish
2. The New India Assurance Co Ltd

CATEGORY OF CASE: Motor Accident Claim

CASE NUMBER: 1. MCOP Pending Case No: 172/2014

2. Lok Adalat Case No: 154/2017

JURISDICTION: As per the Section 19 of Legal Service Authority

Act, 1987 this case is suitable jurisdiction to try its proceedings
in Lok Adalat.

DATE OF PASSING AWARD: 11/04/2017

FACTS OF THE CASE:

The petitioner Mr. Kannaiya Naidu is an agriculturalist and
milk vendor. He is earning a sum of Rs. 15,000/- per month.
On 06/03/2013 at about 7:30 PM he was standing on the left
side extreme of the road in chennagkuppan Bus Stop to pick
his wife who was expected to come in a bus from katpadi. At
that time a two-wheeler Bajaj Discover bearing Registration
No: TN-23 AM-6276 from east to west direction that is from
26 | P a g e
katpadi to gudiyatham main road was driven by its driver-cum-
owner namely the 1st Respondent herein a rash and negligent
manner endangering human life and hit the petitioner. Due to
this the petitioner sustained several injuries all over the body.
Then he was taken to Govt Vellore Medical College Hospital
for treatment. Since this accident was purely due to the rash
and negligent drive of respondent the petitioner estimates
compensation for a sum of Rs. 6,00,000/- from the
respondents.

AWARD:
Suo motto advanced from the original date of hearing to
to-day. Case settled before Lok Adalat for a compensation of
Rs. 2,15,000/-. Award passed as per the terms of settlement
arrived before Lok Adalat.

27 | P a g e
28 | P a g e
 CASE NO: 3

PETITIONER: Revathi

RESPONDENT: 1. Kanniyappan
2. SBI General Insurance Company Ltd

CATEGORY OF CASE: Motor Accident Claim Original Petition

CASE NUMBER: 1. MCOP Pending Case No: 161/2017

JUDGES NAME: 1. Krishnan Sub-Judge(Retd)

2. P. Sakthivelan ‘B’ Panel Lawyer
3. G.Yuvarani Social Worker

JURISDICTION: As per the Section 19 of Legal Service Authority

Act, 1987 this case is suitable to try its proceedings in Lok
Adalat.

DATE OF PASSING AWARD: 21/03/2018

29 | P a g e
FACTS OF THE CASE:
The petitioner claimed Rs. 20,00,000 for the cause of injury
from the respondent in CJM Court of Vellore. Later both the
parties i.e. petitioner and respondent have agreed to settle
the case through Lok Adalat settlement. Now this case placed
before the bench of this Lok Adalat.

AWARD:
Suo motto advanced. Records received from DLSA Vellore case
was settled before Lok Adalat. Award passed for Rs.2,43,000/-
as per the term of settlement arrived before Lok Adalat.

30 | P a g e
31 | P a g e
CONCLUSION
We must remember that the Lok Adalats are not substitutes for
existing courts. Lok Adalat lends itself to easy settlement of money
claims; there is scope for other disputes as well. Lok Adalat is a boon
to the litigant public, where they can get their dispute settled faster
and at free of cost. Experience has shown that it’s one of the efficient
and important ADR and most suited to the Indian environment,
culture and social interests.

32 | P a g e