Lok Adalat and Other Courts: Section 19, the Award's Finality, and Permanent Lok Adalats

A Lok Adalat ("people's court") is not a separate tier of the judiciary; it is a forum for settling disputes by compromise, set up under the Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987, and its defining feature is that once it decides a case, that decision cannot be challenged the way a normal judgment can.

Who organises a Lok Adalat, and what it can hear (Section 19)

Section 19 lets legal services authorities and committees at every level, Central, State, District and Taluk, organise Lok Adalats as often as needed, for the areas and the kinds of cases they specify. A Lok Adalat can take up two categories of matter: a case already pending before any court, or a dispute that has not yet been brought before any court at all. The one hard limit worth remembering: a Lok Adalat has no jurisdiction over an offence that is not compoundable under any law, since a Lok Adalat works by compromise, not by adjudicating guilt.

How a case actually gets there (Section 20)

A pending case reaches a Lok Adalat in one of two ways: both parties agree, or one party applies and the court is satisfied there is a realistic chance of settlement, or that the matter is otherwise appropriate. A dispute that has not yet reached any court reaches a Lok Adalat when one of the parties applies directly to the organising authority. Once referred, the Lok Adalat must act "with utmost expedition to arrive at a compromise or settlement," guided by "principles of justice, equity, fair play and other legal principles," not by strict procedural law.

The award: final, binding, and unappealable (Section 21)

This is the provision the exam actually tests. Section 21(1) deems every award of a Lok Adalat to be a decree of a civil court (or an order of another court, as the case may be), and where a compromise is reached in a case already before a court, the court fee already paid is refunded under the Court Fees Act, 1870. Section 21(2) then states plainly: the award is "final and binding on all the parties to the dispute, and no appeal shall lie to any court against the award." There is no appellate route at all, which is the trade-off for a forum built around voluntary compromise rather than contested adjudication: a party who signs on to a Lok Adalat settlement cannot later challenge it as they could an ordinary judgment.

Permanent Lok Adalats: a 2002 addition, and a real distinction

The 2002 amendment inserted Section 22B, letting the Central or a State Authority establish Permanent Lok Adalats for public utility services (transport, postal, telegraph, telephone, electricity, water supply, public health, insurance, and similar services notified by the government). The difference that actually matters for the exam: an ordinary Lok Adalat can only settle a case both sides agree to send it, but a Permanent Lok Adalat can, for disputes up to a specified value, decide the matter on merits if conciliation fails, rather than simply closing the file with no settlement. This is what makes it "permanent" in substance, not just in name: unlike an ordinary Lok Adalat, which exists only as an occasional sitting, a Permanent Lok Adalat is a standing body for these specified services, and it does not have to send parties away just because they could not agree.

Quick revision points

• Lok Adalats are constituted under the Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987, at the Central, State, District and Taluk levels (Section 19).
• No jurisdiction over a non-compoundable offence, since the forum works by compromise, not adjudication of guilt.
• A pending case reaches a Lok Adalat by mutual agreement or one party's application plus court satisfaction (Section 20); a pre-litigation dispute reaches it by direct application to the organising authority.
• An award is deemed a civil court decree, final and binding, with no appeal to any court (Section 21), the single most tested fact in this chapter.
• Permanent Lok Adalats (2002 amendment, Section 22B) cover public utility services and can decide a case on merits if conciliation fails, unlike an ordinary Lok Adalat.

Because the "no appeal" rule is absolute and easy to state as a false either/or against other forms of ADR, work through the practice questions on this chapter once the Section 19/20/21 sequence is fixed rather than only familiar.