Wa
WA Nos. 1365/2024 & 1352/2024
Original Judgment Date:
July 25, 2024
Original Case Numbers:
WP(C) No. 16818 of 2022 and WP(C) No. 16681 of 2022
Appellant/Petitioner in WA No. 1365/2024:
T.S. Joseph, aged 60, son of Savier, residing at Thundaparambil House, Vechoor, Thalayazham P.O, Vaikom, Kottayam District, Kerala.
Respondents in WA No. 1365/2024:
1. The Federal Bank Ltd., represented by its Manager, Puttadi P.O, Idukki District, Kerala.
2. Debt Recovery Tribunal-II, Ernakulam, represented by its Registrar.
3. Debt Recovery Appellate Tribunal, Chennai, represented by its Registrar.
Appellants/Petitioners in WA No. 1352/2024:
1. Binu Vincent, aged 52, son of late M.A. Vincent, residing at Mannanal House, Puttadi P.O, Anakkara Village, Idukki, Kerala.
2. Mini Vincent, daughter of late M.A. Vincent, residing at Mannanal House, Puttadi P.O, Anakkara Village, Idukki, Kerala.
Respondents in WA No. 1352/2024:
1. The Federal Bank, represented by its Branch Manager, Puttadi P.O, Idukki District, Kerala.
2. Header Systems Pvt. Ltd., Cardamom Auctioneers, Nedumkandom P.O, Idukki District, Kerala.
3. Debt Recovery Tribunal-II, Ernakulam, represented by its Registrar.
4. Debt Recovery Appellate Tribunal, Chennai, represented by its Registrar.
Facts:
The case arises from a dispute regarding the enforcement of a Lok Adalat award that required certain defendants to pay a sum of ₹33,00,000 in ten installments. T.S. Joseph claimed he was not a signatory to the settlement agreement, arguing that the Lok Adalat award should not be binding on him. The Debt Recovery Tribunal ruled that it lacked jurisdiction to assess the validity of the Lok Adalat award.
Legal Issues:
1. Whether a Lok Adalat award can be enforced against a non-signatory party.
2. The jurisdiction of the Debt Recovery Tribunal concerning Lok Adalat awards.
Holding:
The Court referenced a previous ruling in *Komalavally v. Syamala* (2024 5 KHC 557), which established that an award passed by the Lok Adalat without the signatures of the parties involved cannot be executed against those non-signatories. The Court agreed with this interpretation and concluded that T.S. Joseph, not being a signatory to the award, could not be bound by it.
Conclusion:
WA No. 1352/2024 filed by Binu Vincent was dismissed.
WA No. 1365/2024 filed by T.S. Joseph was disposed of with the observation that he cannot be bound by the Lok Adalat award due to his non-signatory status.
Significance:
This case underscores the importance of obtaining signatures from all relevant parties in settlement agreements to ensure enforceability, particularly in the context of Lok Adalat awards. It also clarifies the limitations of the Debt Recovery Tribunal's jurisdiction regarding such awards.
Argument_For:WA Nos. 1365/2024 & 1352/2024 Original Judgment Date: July 25, 2024 Original