P&H HC: Eyewitness Account Not Credible if Eyewitness Directly Identifies Accused in Court  ||  Delhi HC: Conditions u/s 45 PMLA Have to Give Way to Article 21 When Accused Incarcerated for Long  ||  Delhi High Court: Delhi Police to Add Grounds of Arrest in Arrest Memo  ||  Kerala High Court: Giving Seniority on the Basis of Rules is a Policy Decision  ||  Del. HC: Where Arbitrator has Taken Plausible View, Court Cannot Interfere u/s 34 of A&C Act  ||  Ker. HC: No Question of Estoppel Against Party Where Error is Committed by Court Itself  ||  Supreme Court: Revenue Entries are Admissible as Evidence of Possession  ||  SC: Mere Breakup of Relationship Between Consenting Couple Can’t Result in Criminal Proceedings  ||  SC: Bar u/s 195 CrPC Not Attracted Where Proceedings Initiated Pursuant to Judicial Order  ||  NTF Gives Comprehensive Suggestions on Enhancing Better Working Conditions of Medical Professions    

Anjan Das and Ors. v. Subrata Bhattacharjee and Ors. - (High Court of Tripura) (17 Feb 2016)

Legal Services Committee cannot set up ‘Temporary Lok Adalats’

MANU/TR/0043/2016

Civil

A Sub Divisional Legal Services Committee cannot form a ‘Temporary Lok Adalat’ under the Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987. The High Court noted the dispute pertaining to partition of jointly owned land did not come within the purview of ‘Permanent Lok Adalat’; though a Lok Adalat could take cognizance of the matter, it could not adjudicate the same if the parties did not agree to compromise or settlement. The property dispute prefacing proceedings before the Court took a convoluted turn when the ‘Temporary Lok Adalat’ passed an order demarcating land in the absence of one of the parties.

Relevant : B.P. Moideen Sevamandir & Anr. v. A.M. Kutty Hasan, reported in MANU/SC/8467/2008 Section 19 Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987

Tags : LEGAL SERVICES COMMITTEE   LOK ADALAT   ADJUDICATION  

Share :        

Disclaimer | Copyright 2024 - All Rights Reserved