ARUN GUPTA @ ARUN KR. GUPTA & ANR. Vs. THE STATE OF BIHAR THROUGH SECRETARY, LAW DEPARTMENT, GOVT. OF BIHAR & ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE age old principle that fraud vitiates all still holds good and is patently established in the present proceeding. The Court with a heavy heart must record that the working of the Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) and the object behind the enactment and creation of Lok Adalat is being used for oblique purposes rather than for bona fide settlement of dispute between parties. In fact, the Court also feels that some kind of change in the statute is required to be made with regard to utilization of services of retired Judicial Officers for the purposes of Lok Adalat since they feel emboldened by the fact that they are no longer under any administrative or disciplinary control giving them unbridled freedom of action and decision. This observation is being made looking at the outlandish nature and the quality of orders being passed by such Lok Adalats against all cannons and principles of law. At times the Court gets a feeling that such awards are made for extraneous reasons if not consideration. This is not the first instance of its kind coming before the court for adjudication. Petitioners before this Court are seeking quashing of the award dated 19.8.2006 passed by the Permanent Lok Adalat, Arrah in Pre -litigative Case No. 46 of 2006. Narration of events are quite revealing by themselves.

(2.) THE Pre -litigative Case was initiated at the instance of respondent No. 3 of the present writ application who filed the case seeking relief against respondent No. 4, namely, Savitri Devi Gupta for return or direction for payment of Rs. 9,90,000/ -. It was a money claim as would be evident from reading of his application and the prayer made therein which has been annexed as Annexure -2 to the present writ application.

(3.) THERE could have been no dispute even on the mechanism adopted by respondent Nos. 3 and 4, if it had no reflection on properties belonging to other persons of the family. Petitioners were compelled to approach the High Court because by executing the compromise petition and converting it into a kind of award, properties belonging to the present petitioners have also been alienated. Settlement between respondent Nos. 3 and 4 has been arrived at by mis -utilizing the services of Lok Adalat in a totally dishonest manner and the Lok Adalat has been a willing party. This is the background under which petitioners want quashing of the Award contained in Annexure -3.