TMI Blog2008 (5) TMI 745X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o ensure that opportunities for securing justice are not denied to any citizen by reason of economic or other disability. 3. If we are to look at the history of grant of legal aid, it may be noticed that the Law Commission of India in its 14th report on 'reform of Judicial Administration' published in 1958, strongly advocated the need for rendering legal aid to poor litigants and categorically stated that' the rendering of legal aid to the poor litigants is not a minor problem of procedural law but a question of fundamental character'. 4. The committee under the Chairmanship of Hon'ble Mr Justice V.R. Krishna Iyer, then a Member of the Law Commission, constituted by the Government of India Order dated 27th October, 1972 to consider the question of making available to the weaker sections of the community and persons of limited means in general and citizens belonging to the socially and educationally backward class in particular, facilities for (a) legal advice so as to make them aware of their constitutional and legal rights and obligations; and (b) legal aid in proceedings before Civil, Criminal and Revenue Courts so as to make justice more easily av ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , in the public interest, by notification, declare to be a public utility service for the purposes of this Chapter. Section 22-B. provides for establishment of Permanent Lok Adalats. Section 22-C delineates the jurisdiction of Permanent Lok Adalat to take cognizance of cases filed before it, the relevant provisions whereof are as under :- 22-C.- Cognizance of cases by Permanent Lok Adalat :- 1. 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 dispute: Provided that the Permanent Lok Adalat shall not have jurisdiction in respect of any matter relating to an offence not compoundable under any law: Provided further that the Permanent Lok Adalat shall also not have jurisdiction in the matter where the value of the property in dispute exceeds ten lakh rupees: Provided also that the Central Government, may, by notification, increase the limit of ten lakh rupees specified in the second proviso in consultation with the Central Authority. (2) After an application is made under sub- section (1) to the Permanent Lok Adalat, no party to that application shall invoke jurisdiction ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the factual matrix involved herein. 12. First respondent carries on business in electrical goods. He is an authorized distributor of Sony products. He entered into a contract of insurance with the appellant company; the period covered thereunder being 29th August, 2001 to 31st August, 2002. Allegedly, a burglary took place in his godown in the night of 18th /19th August, 2002. He lodged a First Information Report with Doranda Police Station, Ranchi. He also submitted a claim with the appellant alleging that in the said burglary, goods worth Rs.11,14,597/- had been stolen away. 13. Appellant denied and disputed the said claim which refuted the claims by a letter dated 12th August, 2004 interlia stating :- a) The surveyor has observed that the loss cannot be assessed since the quantity claimed by you is not verifiable especially as the authenticity of the documents provided by you creates doubt. b) The surveyor has noticed that there is movement of stock from the godown without proper billing and proper entry which was found by the surveyor on their random inspection of the godown on 27.7.2003. c) ..... ..... d) .... ..... e) The Chartered Accountant who accompan ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e parties, so far finding of Surveyor is concerned, it is regarding merit of the claim which this P.L.A. has to decide after taking evidence. If the claim cannot be refused on the basis of surveyor report at this stage. 17. Appellant filed a writ application challenging the validity of the said order before the Jharkhand High Court. A learned Single Judge of the High Court allowed the said writ application opining that as Sections 479/461 of the Indian Penal Code being not compoundable, the Permanent Lok Adalat had no jurisdiction to entertain the claim opining:- 9 In my considered opinion, the Permanent Lok Adalat has committed great error of law in holding that it has jurisdiction inspite of the fact that the matter relates to an offence not compoundable under any law. The Permanent Lok Adalat has further committed serious error in holding that the finding of the criminal Court in non-compoundable offence is not binding on it. 10. No doubt Chapter VI-A has been inserted in the Legal Services Authority Act, 1987 by Amendment Act of 2002 for constitution of Permanent Lok Adalat for the purpose of pre- litigation, conciliation and settlement, but the whole object of the A ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... iv) Claim of first respondent is mala fide as he had artificially reduced the claim to bring the same within the jurisdiction of the Permanent Lok Adalat, although initially he claimed a sum higher than Rs. 10 lakhs. 20. Mr. Amit Kumar, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent, on the other hand, would urge :- (i) That the value of the property being less than Rs.10 lakhs, the Permanent Lok Adalat had jurisdiction in regard to the dispute in question. (ii) The restrictions imposed in regard to the offences cannot be applied to civil dispute between the parties arising out of any offence as the same relates to the claim of the respondent against the appellant. (iii) Jurisdiction of the Permanent Lok Adalat being confined to determination of the amount of loss caused to the first respondent on account of burglary, Permanent Lok Adalat is not required to decide the case between the accused of burglary and the State. (iv) For invoking the jurisdiction of Permanent Lok Adalat, the question as to whether the offence is compoundable or not is not relevant. (v) Proviso appended to sub-section (5) of Section 22 of the Act should be construed in a manner which ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... but they are of wide amplitude. The two provisos appended to Section 22-C (1) of the Act curtail the jurisdiction of the Permanent Lok Adalat which are as under :- Provided that the Permanent Lok Adalat shall not have jurisdiction in respect of any matter relating to an offence not compoundable under any law: Provided further that the Permanent Lok Adalat shall also not have jurisdiction in the matter where the value of the property in dispute exceeds ten lakh rupees: 23. Chapter VI-A stands independently. Whereas, the heading of the Chapter talks of pre-litigation, conciliation and settlement, Section 22-C (8) of the Act speaks of determination. It creates another adjudicatory authority, the decision of which by a legal fiction would be a decision of a civil court. It has the right to decide a case. The term `decide' means to determine ; to form a definite opinion ; to render judgment. (See Advanced Law Lexicon 3rd Edition 2005 at 1253). Any award made by the Permanent Lok Adalat is executable as a decree. No appeal thereagainst shall lie. The decision of the Permanent Lok Adalat is final and binding on parties. Whereas on the one hand, keeping in view the Parliamenta ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y not enter into the merit of the case but would be entitled to consider as to whether the arbitrator was guilty of misconduct. If he is found to be biased, his award would be set aside. The scope of voluntary settlement through the mechanism of conciliation is also limited. If the parties in such a case can agree to come to settlement in relation to the principal issues, no exception can be taken thereto as the parties have a right of self determination of the forum, which shall help them to resolve the conflict, but when it comes to some formal differences between the parties, they may leave the matter to the jurisdiction of the conciliator. The conciliation only at the final stage of the proceedings would adopt the role of an arbitrator. 26. Here, however, the Permanent Lok Adalat does not simply adopt the role of an Arbitrator whose award could be the subject matter of challenge but the role of an adjudicator. The Parliament has given the authority to the Permanent Lok Adalat to decide the matter. It has an adjudicating role to play. 27. The validity of the said provision is not in question. But then construction of such a provision must be given in such a manner so as ma ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ivil court. Where there is no express exclusion the examination of the remedies and the scheme of the particular Act to find out the intendment becomes necessary and the result of the inquiry may be decisive. In the latter case it is necessary to see if the statute creates a special right or a liability and provides for the determination of the right or liability and further lays down that all questions about the said right and liability shall be determined by the tribunals so constituted, and whether remedies normally associated with actions in Civil Courts are prescribed by the said statue or not... 32. In Dwarka Prasad Agarwal (D) by Lrs. and Anr. vs. Ramesh Chander Agarwal and Ors. : (2003) 6 SCC 220 , this Court held: ...The dispute between the parties was eminently a civil dispute and not a dispute under the provisions of the Companies Act. Section 9 of the Code of Civil Procedure confers jurisdiction upon the civil courts to determine all disputes of civil nature unless the same is barred under a statute either expressly or by necessary implication. Bar of jurisdiction of a civil court is not to be readily inferred. A provision seeking to bar jurisdiction of a civ ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... application is made by either party to the Permanent Lok Adalat to settle a dispute at the pre-litigation stage, the PLA shall do so, and the other party is precluded from approaching the civil court in such a case. 37. Section 22-C(1) contains certain Provisos which limit the jurisdiction of the PLA. Given the principle of statutory interpretation stated earlier, these Provisos, as a corollary, must be interpreted in an expansive manner. 38. What is important to note is that with respect of public utility services, the main purpose behind Section 22-C(8) seems to be that most of the petty cases which ought not to go in the regular Courts would be settled in the pre-litigation stage itself. 39. Therefore, in the instant case, the terms relating to an offence appearing in Proviso 1 must be interpreted broadly, and as the determination before the Permanent Lok Adalat will involve the question as to whether or not an offence, which is non-compoundable in nature, has indeed been committed, this case falls outside the jurisdiction of the Permanent Lok Adalat. 40. We must guard against construction of a statute which would confer such a wide power in the Permanent Lok ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
