Case Note & Summary
The petitioners, legal representatives of the deceased Sri Siddalingaiah, filed a writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India before the High Court of Karnataka at Bengaluru. The petitioners sought to quash an order dated 13.11.2013 passed by the Lok Adalat, Tumkur, in C.Mis.1134/2013, which directed the Deputy Tahsildar/Registrar of Birth and Death, Kora, to correct the death certificate of the deceased. The petitioners also sought a declaration that the death certificate dated 31.01.2014 (Annexure-E) issued pursuant to the Lok Adalat order was valid. The background of the case involves a dispute between the petitioners and respondent No.2 regarding the correctness of the death certificate of Sri Siddalingaiah. The respondent No.2 had approached the Lok Adalat seeking correction of the death certificate, and the Lok Adalat passed an order directing the correction without the consent of the petitioners. The petitioners contended that the Lok Adalat had no jurisdiction to adjudicate the matter as there was a dispute between the parties, and the order was passed without affording them an opportunity of being heard. The court analyzed the provisions of the Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987, particularly Section 20, which empowers a Lok Adalat to determine and arrive at a compromise or settlement between the parties. The court held that a Lok Adalat cannot adjudicate disputed facts or pass orders on merits; its role is limited to facilitating a compromise. Since the order dated 13.11.2013 was passed without the consent of the petitioners and involved a disputed question of fact, it was without jurisdiction. The court quashed the Lok Adalat order and directed the parties to approach the appropriate civil court or authority under the Registration of Births and Deaths Act, 1969, for resolution of the dispute. The writ petition was allowed.
Headnote
A) Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987 - Section 20 - Jurisdiction of Lok Adalat - Lok Adalat can only pass an award based on compromise or settlement between parties; it cannot adjudicate disputed facts or pass orders on merits. The order dated 13.11.2013 passed by the Lok Adalat, Tumkur, in C.Mis.1134/2013, which directed correction of a death certificate without consent of the petitioners, was held to be without jurisdiction and quashed. (Paras 1-10) B) Constitutional Law - Articles 226 and 227 - Maintainability of Writ Petition - A writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India is maintainable against an order of a Lok Adalat if the order is passed without jurisdiction or in violation of principles of natural justice. The High Court can exercise its supervisory jurisdiction to quash such orders. (Paras 1-10) C) Registration of Births and Deaths Act, 1969 - Correction of Death Certificate - Dispute regarding the correctness of a death certificate is a civil dispute that requires adjudication by a competent civil court or appropriate authority under the Act, and cannot be decided by a Lok Adalat in the absence of a compromise. (Paras 1-10)
Issue of Consideration
Whether a Lok Adalat has the jurisdiction to adjudicate and pass orders on merits in a matter where there is a dispute regarding the correctness of a death certificate, and whether such an order is sustainable in law.
Final Decision
The writ petition is allowed. The order dated 13.11.2013 passed by the Lok Adalat, Tumkur, in C.Mis.1134/2013 is quashed. The parties are at liberty to approach the appropriate civil court or authority under the Registration of Births and Deaths Act, 1969, for resolution of the dispute.
Law Points
- Lok Adalat jurisdiction limited to compromise and settlement
- cannot adjudicate disputed facts
- Section 20 Legal Services Authorities Act 1987
- writ petition maintainable against Lok Adalat order
- death certificate correction
- civil dispute
