UNION OF INDIA Vs. ANGOM ONGBI IBEYAIMA DEVI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. N. Ibotombi, learned CGSC appearing for the petitioners and Mr. A. Nilamani Singh, learned senior counsel assisted by Mr. Ng. Prem Kumar, learned advocate and Mr. A. Bimol, learned counsel for the respondent.

(2.) The following facts in a nutshell will be sufficient for deciding the present writ peti - tion : On 14.3.1984 there was a volley ball match at Naoria Pakhanglakpa Volley Ball Ground at Heirangoithong, Imphal and there were about 3000 (three thousand) specta - tors including the present petitioners No. 3,4,5 and other members of CRPF. Suddenly the CRPF personnel witnessing the said volley - ball match fired several rounds from their ser - vice fire arms in or around the said volley - ball ground. In the said incident 13 (thirteen) civilians/spectators were injured and also one CRPF constable died. For the said unfortu - nate incident Shri Y. Ibotombi Singh, the then District & Sessions Judge, (later on Judge of the Gauhati High Court), was appointed by the Government of Manipur under the Com - mission of Inquiry Act, 1952 for holding an inquiry. For claiming compensation a number of civil suits including the present Original Suit were filed by the legal representatives of those thirteen civilians who were killed in the said incident before the competent civil court. While the said civil suit was pending before the Court of Additional District Judge (Fast Track Court), Manipur East at Imphal, the respondents filed an application u/s 89 of the Civil Procedure Code (CPC) read with Sec - tion 20(l)(i)(b) of the Legal Services Authori - ties Act, 1987 for referring connected civil suits to the Lok Adalat for amicable settle - ment and disposal of the original suit. There- spondents filed the said application for refer - ring to the Lok Adalat only on the grounds which are quoted here under :

(3.) To the said application of the respondents u/s 89 CPC read with S.20(l)(i)(b) of the Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987, the present petitioners filed objection seriously objecting that there is absolutely no element of settlement of the said suit which may be acceptable to them. The main ground of obj ection taken by the present petitioners in the said objection are quoted hereunder :