TMI Blog2023 (6) TMI 55X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t to an award passed in respect of Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act is concerned, the Hon ble Apex Court in K.N. GOVINDAN KUTTY MENON VERSUS C.D. SHAJI [ 2011 (11) TMI 783 - SUPREME COURT ] has categorically held that an award of Lok Adalat in respect of Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act is to be treated as a decree under Section 21 of Legal Services Authority Act. In the present case, it is noteworthy that vide order dated 29.08.2017 in CC No. 541812/2016, the learned Trial Court had referred the matter to National Lok Adalat which was to be held on 09.09.2017 for settlement proceedings - Prior to appearing before the National Lok Adalat on 09.09.2017, presumably to save their time, the parties had entered into a Memorandum of Understanding/Settlement Agreement a day prior i.e. on 08.09.2017. Thereafter, the matter was listed before the National Lok Adalat on 09.09.2017 and the settlement agreement dated 08.09.2017 was placed before the learned Presiding Judge, National Lok Adalat (Central), Delhi. It is not disputed that the learned Judge who was preceding over the National Lok Adalat had recorded the statements of both the parties on oath on 09.09.2017 and ac ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ated:- 29-5-2023 - HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE SWARANA KANTA SHARMA For the Petitioner Through: Col. R. Balasubramaniam, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Desh Raj, Mr. Sachin Sharma and Mr. Gurkirat Singh, Advocates. For the Respondent Through: Mr. Anil Kumar Singh and Mr. Ganesh Kumar, Advocates JUDGMENT SWARANA KANTA SHARMA, J. 1. By way of above-captioned petitions filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 ( Cr.P.C. ), the petitioner seeks the following reliefs: i. Setting aside of order dated 27.09.2019 passed by learned Metropolitan Magistrate (NI Act), Central, Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi in Complaint Case No. 6779/2017, and dismiss the application under Section 145(2) of Negotiable Instruments Act, in CRL. M.C. 6010/2019; ii. Setting aside of order dated 27.09.2019 passed by learned Metropolitan Magistrate (NI Act), Central, Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi in Complaint Case No. 6780/2017, and dismiss the application under Section 145(2) of Negotiable Instruments Act, in CRL.M.C. 6028/2019; iii. Setting aside of orders dated 30.04.2019 and 03.12.2019 passed by learned Metropolitan Magistrate (NI Act), Central, Tis Hazari Courts, Del ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... passed by learned Metropolitan Magistrate (NI Act), Central, Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi in Complaint Case No. 6779/2017 and 6780/2017 respectively, impugned before this Court reads as under: ...On last date of hearing, notice was framed against the accused and the matter was listed today for orders on the application filed by the accused u/s 145(2) of Nl Act. Written submissions have already been filed. Arguments heard. Record perused. The accused has flatly denied the averments of the complainant and has infact stated that he has already made payment to the complainant for an amount more than what is so being demanded of him. He has also filed on record several documents in support thereof. Considering all of this, the contentions elaborately stated in the application filed by the accused u/s 145(2) of Nl Act and the defence raised by the him on 16.09.2019 at the time of framing of notice, this court is of opinion that both the versions, i.e. of the complainant as well as the accused, need to be contested in due course through a proper trial and hence an opportunity should be afforded to the accused to cross examine the complainant. In view of the above, the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... used to lead cross examination of complainant... * * * * CC No. 541812/16 03.12.2019 Today I am working as Link MM Present: Counsel for complainant Accused with counsel Copy of the complaint and copy of all the documents have been supplied to the the accused. Notice u/s 251 Cr.P.C: framed against the accused. Notice has been read over and explained to the accused to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. Plea of defence of accused has been recorded. Statement of the accused recorded us 294. CrPC, the accused has admitted the dishonour of the cheque and legal notice. Accordingly, there is no need to examine the witnesses at no. 2 and 3 in the list of witnesses and they are dropped from the list. Application u/s 145(2) of NI Act has already been filed on behalf of the accused on the LDOH and same was allowed on the same day. List the matter for CE on 23.04.2020. Two opportunities are granted to the accused to lead cross examination of complainant... 6. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that respondent is governed by the provisions of estoppel and he was not entitled to move an application under Section 1 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t or, as the case may be, an order of any other court and where a compromise or settlement has been arrived at, by a Lok Adalat in a case referred to it under sub-section (1) of section 20, the court-fee paid in such case shall be refunded in the manner provided under the Court-fees Act, 1870 (7 of 1870). (2) Every award made by a Lok Adalat shall be final and binding on all the parties to the dispute, and no appeal shall lie to any court against the award... 11. In this regard, it will also be profitable to refer to the observations of Hon ble Supreme Court in case of P. T Thomas v. Thomas Job (2005) 6 SCC 344 whereby it has been held as under: ...Award of Lok Adalat 20. The Lok Adalat shall proceed and dispose the cases and arrive at a compromise or settlement by following the legal principles, equity and natural justice. Ultimately the Lok Adalat passes an award, and every such award shall be deemed to be a decree of Civil Court or as the case may be which is final. Award of Lok Adalat shall be final 21. The Lok Adalat will passes the award with the consent of the parties, therefore there is no need either to reconsider or review the ma ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the award passed by the Lok Adalat under Section 20 of the Act. In that case, the award was passed by the Lok Adalat which had resulted in disposal of the appeal pending before the High Court relating to a claim case arising out of Motor Vehicle Act. One party to the appeal felt aggrieved of the Award and, therefore, questioned its legality and correctness by filing a writ petition under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India. The High Court dismissed the writ petition holding it to be not maintainable. The aggrieved party, therefore, filed an appeal by way of special leave before this Court. This Court, after examining the scheme of the Act allowed the appeal and set aside the order of the High Court. This Court held that the High Court was not right in dismissing the writ petition as not maintainable. It was held that the only remedy available with the aggrieved person was to challenge the award of the Lok Adalat by filing a writ petition under Article 226 or/and 227 of the Constitution of India in the High Court and that too on very limited grounds. The case was accordingly remanded to the High Court for deciding the writ petition filed by the aggrieved person on its me ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... N. Govindan Kutty Menon v. C.D. Shaji (2012) 2 SCC 51 has categorically held that an award of Lok Adalat in respect of Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act is to be treated as a decree under Section 21 of Legal Services Authority Act. The relevant observations of the Court are as under: 26. From the above discussion, the following propositions emerge: 1. In view of the unambiguous language of Section 21 of the Act, every award of the Lok Adalat shall be deemed to be a decree of a civil court and as such it is executable by that Court. 2. The Act does not make out any such distinction between the reference made by a civil court and criminal court. 3. There is no restriction on the power of the Lok Adalat to pass an award based on the compromise arrived at between the parties in respect of cases referred to by various Courts (both civil and criminal), Tribunals, Family court, Rent Control Court, Consumer Redressal Forum, Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal and other Forums of similar nature. 4. Even if a matter is referred by a criminal court under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 and by virtue of the deeming provisions, the award passed b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... given hereunder, we are of the view that the interpretation adopted by the Kerala High Court in the impugned order is erroneous. xxx xxx xxx 26. From the above discussion, the following propositions emerge: (1) In view of the unambiguous language of Section 21 of the Act, every award of the Lok Adalat shall be deemed to be a decree of a civil court and as such it is executable by that court. (2) The Act does not make out any such distinction between the reference made by a civil court and a criminal court. (3) There is no restriction on the power of the Lok Adalat to pass an award based on the compromise arrived at between the parties in respect of cases referred to by various courts (both civil and criminal), tribunals, Family Court, Rent Control Court, Consumer Redressal Forum, Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal and other forums of similar nature. (4) Even if a matter is referred by a criminal court under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 and by virtue of the deeming provisions, the award passed by the Lok Adalat based on a compromise has to be treated as a decree capable of execution by a civil court. 79. The judgment of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... inal case, the award of the Lok Adalat has to be treated as a decree capable of execution by a civil court. The guidelines contained in Damodar S. Prabhu are required to be followed even upon such settlement subject to the discretion to the court concerned to reduce/wave the costs with regard to the specific facts and circumstances of the case. 15. In the present case, it is noteworthy that vide order dated 29.08.2017 in CC No. 541812/2016, the learned Trial Court had referred the matter to National Lok Adalat which was to be held on 09.09.2017 for settlement proceedings. The said order is reproduced herein-under: ...Offence being bailable, accused is admitted to bail on furnishing personal bond in the sum of Rs. 80,000/- alongwith one surety in the like amount. Bail bond furnished and accepted. Let the matter be referred to Lok Adalat to be held on 09.09.2017 for settlement proceedings. Be put up for report of settlement on 08.11.2017... 16. Prior to appearing before the National Lok Adalat on 09.09.2017, presumably to save their time, the parties had entered into a Memorandum of Understanding/Settlement Agreement a day prior i.e. on 08.09.2017. Thereaft ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 18. The order dated 16.10.2018 in CC No.6780/2017 also records the statement of accused that he shall make regular payments as per settlement reached between the parties. ...Accused in person along with Ld. Counsel Mr. Anil Kumar Singh. Considering that offences alleged against the accused are bailable in nature, accused is admitted to bail on furnishing personal bond in the sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- alongwith one surety in the like amount. Personal bond furnished. Considered. Accepted till the next date of hearing subject to furnishing of surety bonds. It is stated by the accused that he has received all the documents, therefore, scrutiny of document is completed. It is stated by the accused that he shall make regular payment as per the settlement reached between the parties... 19. This Court also, in the order dated 26.11.2019, had recorded the submission made on behalf of petitioner herein that the accused, after entering into the settlement, was regular in making payments and had paid about Rs. 40 lakhs in a period of one and a half years, before defaulting in make the payments. The relevant portion of the said order reads as under: ...It i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
