ADALAT REPORT DISTRICT LEGAL SERVICE AUTHORITY MUTTOM COURT

IDUKKI DISTRICT

INTRODUCTION

Today’s world has become globalized and commercial with the advent of technology. People can now
contact each other and settle business deals and disputes when they are sitting at the opposite ends of
the world. Most people no longer have the time to go and file papers at the courts and then wait long
periods for a hearing. We are rapidly approaching a stage where litigation is being replaced with
alternative dispute resolution (ADR), due to the inefficiencies and drawbacks of litigation. India hasn’t
quite reached a stage where litigation has been completely displaced by ADR methods, but the legal
system is beginning to see the benefits of ADR. This article shall be helpful to give you an overview of the
ADR methods and how it is beneficial. Alternative dispute resolution (ADR) is designed to settle disputes
outside of the courtroom with the help of an impart third party. This path is generally accessible after
efforts between the client and the insurer to resolve any differences between themselves fails and
reaches an impasse. When the disputing parties agree to try alternative dispute resolution procedures,
the ADR process starts. This understanding could be imposed by a court order, a contract clause, or both.
It could also be voluntary. The parties select the most effective ADR strategy for their dispute, frequently
with the help of legal counsel.

Unlike traditional litigation, the procedures of ADR are generally collaborative, letting the parties realize
each other’s perspectives even lets the parties analyse and suggest creative solutions, which a typical
courtroom does not permit to impose legally.

Importance of ADR in India

To deal with the situation of pendency of cases in courts in India, ADR plays a significant role in India
through its diverse techniques. Alternative Dispute Resolution mechanism provides scientifically
developed techniques to the Indian judiciary which helps in reducing the burden on the courts. ADR
provides various modes of settlement including, Arbitration, conciliation, mediation, negotiation, and
Lok Adalat. Here, negotiation means self-counselling between the parties to resolve their dispute but it
doesn’t have any statutory recognition in India.

ADR is also founded on such fundamental rights, Article 14 and 21 which deals with equality before the
law and the right to life and personal liberty respectively. ADR’s motive is to provide social-economic and
political justice and maintain integrity in the society enshrined in the preamble. ADR also strives to
achieve equal justice and free legal aid provided under article 39-A relating to the Directive Principle of
State Policy (DPSP).

Few important provisions related to ADR

• Section 89 of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908 provides that opportunity to the people, if it
appears to the court there exist elements of settlement outside the court then the court
formulates the terms of the possible settlement and refers the same for Arbitration,
Conciliation, Mediation or Lok Adalat.
 • The Acts which deal with Alternative Dispute Resolution are Arbitration and Conciliation Act,
of 1996 and,

• The Legal Services Authority Act, 1987

Advantages of Alternative Dispute Resolution

• Less time consuming: people resolve their dispute in a short period as compared to courts

• Cost-effective method: it saves a lot of money if one undergoes the litigation process.

• It is free from the technicalities of courts, here informal ways are applied in resolving dispute.

• People are free to express themselves without any fear of court of law. They can reveal the
true facts without disclosing it to any court.

• Efficient way: there are always chances of restoring relationship back as parties discuss their
issues together on the same platform.

• It prevents further conflict and maintains good relationship between the parties.

• It preserves the best interest of the parties

METHODS AND TECHNIQUES OF ADR

The word “Alternative Dispute Resolution” includes various negotiation mechanisms including, Lok
Adalats, Arbitration, Conciliation, and Mediation in its fold. Several countries have used this Alternative
Dispute Resolution strategy for successful dispute resolution. Mediation is the most common sort of
alternative dispute resolution. In addition to this, some had defined mediation as the most appropriate
method for resolving disputes. Mediation as a tool for resolving disputes is not a new concept. To put it
simply, mediation is a friendly dispute settlement involving a neutral third party who serves as a
facilitator and is called a’ mediator. ADR is usually less formal, less expensive, and less time-consuming
than traditional trials. ADR can also give people a greater opportunity to decide when and how to settle
their conflict. Arbitration, Conciliation, Mediation, Judicial Settlement, and Lok Adalat are the most
commonly used ADR processes in civil proceedings. Section 89 of the Code of Civil Procedure allows for
the out-of-court resolution of disputes. It is founded on the Law Commission of India’s and the Malimath
Committee’s suggestions. The Law Commission of India advised that the Court may encourage any party
to a suit or action to attend in person in order to find an amicable resolution of the disagreement.
The Malimath Committee recommended that it be made compulsory for the Court to refer the conflict

to arbitration through Arbitration, Conciliation, Mediation, Judicial Arbitration via Lok Adalat after the

issues have been framed. The case could only proceed further if the parties refuse to resolve their

differences through any of the alternative dispute resolution approaches. The different methods of ADR

can be summarized as under: –

1. Arbitration

2. Conciliation

3. Mediation

4. Judicial Settlement

5. Lok Adalat.

1. Arbitration

Arbitration, a type of alternative dispute resolution (ADR), is a strategy for resolving conflicts outside of
the court system in which the parties to a disagreement refer it to one or more people, known as
arbitrators, to whom they intend to be bound by their judgment. It is a method of dispute settlement in
which a third person examines the evidence in the case and renders a legally enforceable decision for
both parties. Arbitration awards have limited rights of review and appeal. Arbitration is not the same as
civil and mediation proceedings. Arbitration can be optional, or mandatory. Clearly, mandatory
arbitration can only come from a law or arrangement that is mutually signed where the parties agree to
arbitrate all current or future disputes without necessarily knowing what disputes will ever occur. In
India, if the matter is referred to Arbitration then the provisions of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act,
1996 will apply.

[Link]

It is a form of alternative dispute resolution in which the parties to a dispute hire a conciliator to help
them resolve their issues individually. They do this by reducing conflicts, strengthening coordination,
identifying problems, offering technical assistance, discussing possible solutions and bringing about a
negotiated settlement. In this manner, it is a bit different from Arbitration.
It is a consensual process in which the parties involved are free to reach an agreement and try to resolve
their disagreement through conciliation. The method is versatile, which helps the parties to determine
the time, duration and content of the conciliation procedure. Those proceedings are seldom public.
These are interest-based, as the conciliator must take into account not only the legal positions of the
parties but also their; economic, financial and/or personal interests when negotiating a settlement. In
the Indian sense, the terms conciliation and mediation are synonymous. Conciliation is a cooperative
mechanism through which the conciliator, a qualified and professional neutral, facilitates negotiations
between the disputing parties and assists them in recognizing their differences and desires in order to
reach an arrangement that is mutually acceptable. Once a settlement has been found before a
conciliator between the parties to the conflict, the resolution has the effect of an arbitration award and
is legally tenable in any court in the country. Many trade disputes, in which it is not necessary that a
binding and enforceable decision should take place, are subject to conciliation. Conciliation may be
especially appropriate where the parties to the conflict seek to preserve and sustain their commercial
relations.

[Link]
Today, mediation is a voluntary and informal method of dispute resolution throughout the world. It is a
simple, voluntary, party-centered and structured negotiation process in which a neutral third party helps
parties resolve their disputes friendly through the use of specified communication and negotiation
techniques. Mediation is a process where the parties are themselves in control of it.
The mediator’s role is strictly that of a facilitator, assisting the parties in reaching a negotiated settlement
of their disagreement. The mediator takes no decisions and does not enforce his opinion on what should
be a fair settlement. Both sides meet with an experienced neutral mediator during the mediation
process. The session starts with each side explaining the issue from their point of view, and the remedy
they seek. Once the respective views of each party is discussed, the mediator then splits them into
private rooms, initiating a “caucus conference” process and then “joint meetings with the parties.” Both
sides agree to the limit. The mediator does not have the power to dictate his decision regarding the
party. Mediation allows a conflict to be handled swiftly, with minimal stress and expense, while still
preserving the parties’ relationship and maintaining anonymity.

3. Judicial settlement
Section 89 of the Code of Civil Procedure also refers to judicial settlement as one of the alternative
modes of resolution of disputes. There are, of course, no specific rules for such settlements framed up to
now. The term “Judicial Settlement” is however specified in Section 89 of the Code. It was provided that
the provisions of the Legal Service Authority Act, 1987, would apply when there is a judicial settlement.
This means that the Judge concerned, seeks to settle the dispute between the parties in a legal
settlement amicably. Such settlement shall be deemed to be an agreement within the scope of the Legal
Services Authority Act, 1987, if any friendly settlement is resorted to and reached in the case at
question. Section 21of the Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987 specifies that each Lok Adalat award shall
be deemed a Civil Court decree. India has no written guidance on judicial settlement

5. Lok Adalat
The idea that is gaining popularity is that of Lok Adalats or the courts of the people as formed by the
government to settle disputes through conciliation and compromise. It is a judicial body and a dispute
settlement organization established for social justice by the citizens themselves, based on the settlement
or agreement obtained through formal negotiations. Section 89 of the Code of Civil Procedure also
provides for the appeal to the Lok Adalat of pending Civil disputes. When the matter is referred to the
Lok Adalat then it will follow the provisions of the Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987. The holding of
Lok Adalat is governed by Section 19 of the Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987.

INTRODUCTION OF LOK ADALAT

It goes without saying that the backlog of pending cases in the courts of India has severed the
faith of Indian citizens in seeking justice. Instead of waiting in queues for years and passing on
litigation by inheritance, people are inclined either to avoid litigation or to start resorting to
extra-judicial methods. As a measure to restore this faith and encourage speedy disposal of such
myriad of cases, the Judiciary has been actively promoting various Alternative Dispute
Resolution methods. One such effective method is the concept of
“Lok-Adalat.” The literal translation of the Hindi moniker, Lok-Adalat means, “People’s Court.”
The idea of Lok-Adalat was mainly advocated by Justice P.N Bhagwati, a former
Chief Justice of India. Lok-Adalat is India’s unique form of Alternative Dispute Resolution, which
has proven to be a successful alternative to conventional litigation. It has been given a statutory
recognition by the virtue of the Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987. The system of Lok-Adalat is
based on the principles of Panch Parmeshwar of Gram Panchayats. Lok Adalat is a non-
adversarial system, whereby mock-courts are held by the State Authority, District Authority,
Supreme Court Legal Services Committee, High Court Legal Services Committee or Taluka Legal
Services Committee. It is a forum where voluntary efforts are aimed at bringing about settlement
of disputes between the parties through conciliatory and persuasive efforts. This service is
provided free of charge to the litigants by Courts and Central/State government. Typically, a Lok-
Adalat panel is a three member panel who acts as conciliators and are generally amoung serving
or retired judicial officers, social workers and advocates. Both pre-litigation and post-litigation
efforts are invited by the Lok-Adalat. The Lok-Adalat can deal with all civil cases: matrimonial
disputes, land disputes, property disputes, labour disputes and compoundable criminal cases.
The award made by Lok-Adalat is deemed to be a decree of a Civil Court and is final binding on
all parties. No appeal lies before any court against its award.
 LEGISLATIVE AND JUDICIAL CONTRIBUTION UNDER LAW:

The Legal Services Authorities Act pursuant to the constitutional mandate of in Article 39-A of
the Constitution of India, contains various provisions for the settlement of disputes through Lok
Adalats. It is an Act to constitute legal service authorities to provide free and competent legal
services to the weaker sections of society, to ensure that opportunities for securing justice are
not denied to any citizen by reason of economic and other disabilities, and to organize Lok
Adalats to secure that the operation of the legal system promotes justice on the basis of equal
opportunity.

Lok Adalat is one of the alternative dispute redressal mechanisms, it is a forum where disputes
or cases pending in the court of law or at the pre-litigation stage are settled or compromised
amicably. Lok Adalats have been given statutory status under the Legal Service Authorities Act,
of 1987. The main role is to persuade the parties to hit upon a solution and help in reconciling
the contesting differences.

In the present scenario, Lok Adalat is very helpful and effective dispute resolution. Lok Adalats
decide on the matter on the basis of a settlement that the parties in an unbiased manner and
help them to reach a settlement. It aids people by providing them less cost and speedy justice.
National Legal Service Authority Act was enacted by the parliament in the year of 1987. It came
into force on 9th November 1995. Its main motive is to establish a nation side uniform network
providing free and competent legal services to weaker sections Of the society on the basis of
equal opportunity. National Legal service Authority (NALSA) has been constituted under the
legal services authority Act, 1987 to monitor and evaluate implementation of legal aid programs
and to lay down policies and principles for making legal service available under the Act.

As part of our academic curriculum were required to participate in Lok- Adalat conducted by the
District legal process has very easy what we need is to have a recommendation letter signed by the
principal by our college.

I and my friends contacted the concerned authority of District Legal Service Authority, Idukki with the
concerned letter signed by our college principal.

On the day assigned to us, we went directly to the office and management was made by them for us.
The DLSA office is located in the Muttom Court Complex. We were asked to report to the office at sharp
10 am and we reach there by 9:45 am and were made to sit in the visiting room with the secretary. After
hearing the introductory session sir and ma’am gave a brief session about the various modes of dispute
settlement and legal services Authorities Act.
We got a chance to interact with the parties who came for Lok Adalat proceedings. We were made to
hear their cases when the Adalat was taking place. Cases were related to various matters like family
issues, bank and customer issues, property issues, land issues, maintenance, MACT, NDPS, and so on.

Case No: 1

Case Name: Naziya and Hanna Developers v. Indian Motors Company Ltd.

Case No. RCP/2021

Fact of the case : In this case the Responded who are the tenants residing in landlord is building failed to
pay the default rent for a long time which results in a huge amount of money 2100000 (twenty one lakh )
and on certain term the tenants paid only 15 lakhs instead of 21 lakhs. When the landlord enquired
about it, the manager misbehaved with him and the tenant reduced the rent amount without the
consent of the landlord.

The plaintiff waited so long for justice. Now the case is subjected to the Adalat program and the Indian
Motor feel guilty about their behaviour. They require the land lords to give them some more time. The
judge in this case held the owner to discuss with the manager and make a decision.

Settlement: not yet settled.

Case no: 2

Case name: James George vs. Joseph

Case no: RCP 82/20

In this case, the respondent is the managing partner of a firm hotel Amritha. They have possessed the
building of the petitioner as per the registered rent agreement dated 27-05-2016. After the expiry of said
period the respondent they were nor willing to hand over the building. The petitioner alleged that the
building makes them gain in the business they were ready to pay high rent. But petitioner was not
agreed with that.

Settlement: Not yet settled.

Case No: 3

Case name:. Sanjana vs. Sreejith

Case No: PLP 3584/22

Settlement deed: the respondent agrees to pay a maintenance amount of 7000 (seven thousand) rupees
to petitioner Sanjana per month and the petitioner agrees that.

CONCLUSION
On the basis of legislative interpretation of the Legal Services Authority Act, 1987 and various judicial
pronouncements given by the Supreme Court of India and the High Court is evident that the Lok Adalat
system has been established with the objective to promote justice on the basis of equal opportunity.
However, the objective of the Act shall be met only if it reaches the grass root levels, meaning, more
focus should be shed on access to Lok Adalats to the rural populations.
In conclusion, it can be said that awareness and literacy of such efforts such be given a priority by all
citizens are aware of the judicial remedies available to them. And such a convenient dispute resolution
mechanism as them should be given a preference for speedy disposal of case.