KAMAL KUMAR JAIN Vs. BABILATA JAIN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS petition is filed by the petitioner/plaintiff challenging order Annexure P-1 passed by the Lok Adalat at Guna whereby Appeal No. 2-A/06 pending in the Court of III, Additional District Judge, (Fast Track), Guna is disposed of with a direction to the present petitioner/plaintiff to pay an amount of Rs. 1,88,000/- to the respondent tenant for vacating the premises.

(2.) THE brief facts of the case are that the present petitioner/plaintiff had filed a civil suit against the respondent on the ground of Section 12 (1) (a) and 12 (1) (f) of the M. P. Accommodation Control Act alleging that the defendant in spite of notice are not regular in payment of rent. It is also alleged that the plaintiffs requires the said accommodation for his grandson for starting business of stationary and there is no other suitable accommodation of his own in the city of Guna. The Trial Court decreed the suit. The said judgment and decree is challenged by the defendant/tenant by filing an appeal. During the pendency of the appeal at Lok Adalat was held under the provisions of the Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987. The Lok Adalat directed the present petitioner to pay an amount of Rs. 1,88,000/- to the defendant tenant for executing the decree in his favour. This order is under challenge in this petition.

(3.) THE first contention raised by learned Counsel for the petitioner is that the order Annexure P-1 illegal and without jurisdiction. He submitted that the order passed by the Lok Adalat can be challenged by way of filing a petition under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India. For this purpose he has relied on the judgment of Karnataka High Court in the case of the The Commissioner, Karnataka State Public Instruction Education, Bangalore v. Nirpadi Virbhadrappa Shiva Simpi AIR2001 Kant 504 , AIR2001 KAR 504 , ILR2001 KAR 4338 , 2001 (6 )Karlj402.