Najeeb V.I. v. Permanent Lok Adalat at Ernakulam, for Public Utility Services, represented by its Chairman; Johnson Raiju

## `IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM` ## `PRESENT` ``` THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN ``` ``` THURSDAY, THE 15[TH] DAY OF FEBRUARY 2024 / 26TH MAGHA, 1945 ``` ``` WP(C) NO. 37515 OF 2022 ``` ## `PETITIONER:` ``` NAJEEB V.I., AGED 40 YEARS S/O LATE ISMAIL V.M., VALIYAKATH HOUSE, PIPELINE ROAD, PALLURUTHY, KOCHI - 682 006. BY ADVS. B.RATHEESH SREENATH S. SETHUMADHAVAN D. GYOTHISH CHANDRAN ``` ## `RESPONDENTS:` ``` 1PERMANENT LOK ADALAT AT ERNAKULAM, FOR PUBLIC UTILITY SERVICES, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN GROUND FLOOR, ADR CENTRE, DISTRICT COURT ANNEX PREMISES KALOOR, KOCHI- 17. 2JOHNSON RAIJU, S/O M.J JOSEPH, MAKKIL HOUSE, ARYAD-ATHIPOZHY ROAD, MUNDAMVELI P.O, KOCHI-682007. BY ADV G.KRISHNAKUMAR ``` ``` THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 15.02.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ``` ``` WP(C) NO.37515 of 2022 ``` ``` 2 ``` ## `JUDGMENT` ``` The petitioner impugns Ext.P2 Award of the Permanent Lok Adalat, Ernakulam, on various grounds, including that it exceeded its ``` ``` jurisdiction in considering and adjudicating an ``` ``` issue relating to “Housing”, which is beyond ``` ``` Section 22(A) of the Legal Services Authorities ``` ``` Act, 1987 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act', ``` ``` for short); and further that, it could not have entered into a final Award as has been done, without first engaging the parties in ``` ``` conciliation under Section 22 C (8) of the 'Act'. ``` ``` He thus prays that Ext.P2 be set aside. ``` ``` 2. Smt.Agnet Jarard – learned counsel for ``` ``` the 2nd respondent, however, opposed the afore ``` ``` submissions of the petitioner, as made by his learned counsel – Sri.Ratheesh B., very vehemently, relying upon the judgment of a ``` ``` learned counsel – Sri.Ratheesh B., very ``` ``` WP(C) NO.37515 of 2022 ``` ``` 3 ``` ``` learned Division Bench of this Court in Santhosh ``` ``` T.N. v. Permanent Lok Adalath and others [2023 ``` ``` (2) KHC 1 (DB], arguing that, Section 22 A (b) of the 'Act' vests the Permanent Lok Adalat with ``` ``` enough jurisdiction to deal even with “Housing ``` ``` and Real Estate”. ``` ``` 3.She contented that, therefore, the afore ``` ``` submissions of the petitioner are wholly untenable, particularly when he chose to remain exparte before the Permanent Lok Adalat. She, therefore, prayed that this writ petition be dismissed. ``` ``` 4.I have no doubt that the arguments of ``` ``` Smt.Agnet Jarard, is onterra firma because, ``` ``` when the petitioner chose not to appear before ``` ``` the Permanent Lok Adalat, one wonders how he now ``` ``` raises questions of jurisdiction and such other before this Court. If he wanted to impel them, ``` ``` WP(C) NO.37515 of 2022 ``` ``` 4 ``` ``` he ought to have appeared before the Permanent Lok Adalat; and ought to have filed his ``` ``` objections. When he chose not to do so, his ``` ``` contentions before this Court can only be seen to be an afterthought. ``` ``` 5.That said, it is pertinent that the ``` ``` petitioner says that though had received summons ``` ``` from the Permanent Lok Adalat, the name of his father was shown incorrectly in it; and ``` ``` therefore, that he was under the impression that the person to whom it was addressed to was not himself.Thisexplanationcertainlyis ``` ``` incredulous, if not specious, because once the ``` ``` petitioner concedes to have received summons ``` ``` from the Permanent Lok Adalat, it was upto him to have responded to it, either asserting that it is not him, or that his particulars were ``` ``` WP(C) NO.37515 of 2022 ``` ``` 5 ``` ``` incorrect. Without doing so, he chose to sit on ``` ``` the summons and then invite Ext.P2 order. ``` ``` 6.But, the acme question is if the ``` ``` petitioner can be given one more opportunity before the Loak Adalat. ``` ``` 7.I, therefore, put into Smt.Agnet Jarard ``` ``` – learned counsel for the 2[nd] respondent, whether ``` ``` her client will stand in the way of a limited opportunity of being given to the petitioner, to impel her contentions before the Permanent Lok Adalat, so that the matter can then be disposed of on its merits. She very fairly submitted ``` ``` that, since her client requires substantial ``` ``` justice be done, she will not stand in the way ``` ``` of such opportunity being granted; however ``` ``` praying that this Court fix a specific time frame for the Adalat to dispose of the matter afresh. ``` ``` WP(C) NO.37515 of 2022 ``` ``` 6 ``` ``` Taking note of the afore submissions and adverting to the consent given by the 2[nd] ``` ``` respondent, I allow this writ petition, to the ``` ``` limited extent of directing the Permanent Lok Adalat to rehear the matter and decide whether ``` ``` any modification to Ext.P2 is necessary, after affording necessary opportunities to both sides. ``` ``` I make it clear that, for this purpose, the petitioner will not be entitled to seek any adjournment and will co-operate with the Adalat fully, while the proceedings are completed. ``` ``` For an expeditious compliance of the afore directions, I direct the parties to mark ``` ``` appearance before the Permanent Lok Adalat at 11 A.M on 26.02.2024; on which day, either the said Authority will hear the matter afresh, or assign another convenient date for such; and dispose it ``` ``` WP(C) NO.37515 of 2022 ``` ``` 7 ``` ``` of, not later than one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. ``` ``` Needless to say, further proceedings in the ``` ``` execution against the petitioner, on the basis of Ext.P2, will stand stayed; however, clarifying that this will not interdict any ``` ``` action or orders already issued, which shall be maintained until the afore exercise is completed. ``` ``` Sd/- ``` ## `DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN` ``` JUDGE ``` ``` SAS ``` ``` WP(C) NO.37515 of 2022 ``` ``` 8 ``` ## `APPENDIX OF WP(C) 37515/2022` ``` PETITIONER’S EXHIBITS: ``` ``` Exhibit P1TRUE COPY OF CONTRACT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE PETITIONER AND THE 2ND RESPONDENT. Exhibit P2TRUE COPY OF AWARD DATED 21.01.2019 IN O.P NO. 76/2018 PASSED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT. Exhibit P3RUE COPY OF ORDER DATED 16.09.2022 IN EA NO.113/2022 IN EP NO.26/2019 IN OP NO.76/2018. ```