UNION OF INDIA Vs. TH SANJIT SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD Mr. N. Ibotombi, learned CGSC appearing for the petitioners and Mr. A. Nilamani Singh, learned senior counsel assisted by Mr. Ng. Premkumar, learned Advocate and Mr. A. Bimol, learned counsel for the respondents.

(2.) THE following facts in a nutshell will be sufficient for deciding the present writ petition : 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) spectators 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 service firearms 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 unfortunate incident Shri Y. Ibotombi Singh, the then District and Sessions Judge, (later on Judge of the Gauhati High Court), was appointed by the Government of Manipur under the Commission 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 under Section 89 of the Civil Procedure Code (CPC) read with Section 20 (1) (i) (b) of the Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987 referring connected civil suits to the Lok Adalat for amicable settlement and disposal of the original suit. The respondents filed the said application for referring to the Lok Adalat only on the ground which are quoted hereunder :

(3.) TO the said application of the respondents under Section 89, CPC read with Section 20 (1) (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 objection taken by the present petitioners in the said objection are quoted hereunder :