ALTERNATE DISPUTE RESOLUTION

LOK-ADALATH
 TEAM LIST

SINO NAME REG.NO

AMITHA JOSE .C 474-14551011

1

ATHIRA KRISHNAN 474-16551035

2

CHITHU .M 474-16551045
3

KRISHNENDU .A.S 474-16551078

4

5 LIYA THANKACHAN 474-16551083

6 RAJI .A .VISWAM 474-16551104

 CHAPTER – 1

INTRODUCTION

Alternate Dispute Resolution Mechanism

The Concept & its efficacy:

“It is the spirit and not the form of law that keeps the justice alive.” LJ Earl
Warren The concept of Conflict Management through Alternative Dispute Resolution
(ADR) has introduced a new mechanism of dispute resolution that is non adversarial.
A dispute is basically ‘lis inter partes’ and the justice dispensation system in India
has found an alternative to Adversarial litigation in the form of ADR Mechanism. New
methods of dispute resolution such as ADR facilitate parties to deal with the
underlying issues in dispute in a more cost-effective manner and with increased
efficacy. In addition, these processes have the advantage of providing parties with
the opportunity to reduce hostility, regain a sense of control, gain acceptance of the
outcome, resolve conflict in a peaceful manner, and achieve a greater sense of
justice in each individual case.

The resolution of disputes takes place usually in private and is more viable,
economic, and efficient. ADR is generally classified into at least four types:
negotiation, mediation, collaborative law, and arbitration. (Sometimes a fifth type,
conciliation, is included as well, but for present purposes it can be regarded as a
form of mediation Need of ADR in India: The system of dispensing justice in India
has come under great stress for several reasons mainly because of the huge
pendency of cases in courts. In India, the number of cases filed in the courts has
shown a tremendous increase in recent years resulting in pendency and delays
underlining the need for alternative dispute resolution methods.

It is in this context that a Resolution was adopted by the Chief Ministers and
the Chief Justices of States in a conference held in New Delhi on 4th December
1993 under the chairmanship of the then Prime Minister and presided over by the
Chief Justice of India. It said: "The Chief Ministers and Chief Justices were of the
opinion that Courts were not in a position to bear the entire burden of justice system
and that a number of disputes lent themselves to resolution by alternative modes
such as arbitration, mediation and negotiation. They emphasized the desirability of
disputants taking advantage of alternative dispute resolution which provided
procedural flexibility, saved valuable time and money and avoided the stress of a
conventional trial".

In a developing country like India with major economic reforms under way
within the framework of the rule of law, strategies for swifter resolution of disputes for
lessening the burden on [1]the courts and to provide means for expeditious
resolution of disputes, there is no better option but to strive to develop alternative
modes of dispute resolution (ADR) by establishing facilities for providing settlement
of disputes through arbitration, conciliation, mediation and negotiation.

IMPACT OF ADR

The technique of ADR is an effort to design a workable and fair alternative to

our traditional judicial system. It is a fast track system of dispensing justice. There
are various ADR techniques viz. arbitration, mediation, conciliation, mediation-
arbitration, mini-trial, private judging, final offer arbitration, court-annexed ADR and
summary jury trial. These techniques have been developed on scientific lines in USA,
UK, France, Canada, China, Japan, South Africa, Australia and Singapore. ADR has
emerged as a significant movement in these countries and has not only helped
reduce cost and time taken for resolution of disputes, but also in providing a
congenial atmosphere and a less formal and less complicated forum for various
types of disputes.

The Arbitration Act, 1940 was not meeting the requirements of either the
international or domestic standards of resolving disputes. Enormous delays and
court intervention frustrated the very purpose of arbitration as a means for
expeditious resolution of disputes. The Supreme Court in several cases repeatedly
pointed out the need to change the law.

The Public Accounts Committee too deprecated the Arbitration Act of 1940. In
the conferences of Chief Justices, Chief Ministers and Law Ministers of all the States,
it was decided that since the entire burden of justice system cannot be borne by the
courts alone, an Alternative Dispute Resolution system should be adopted. Trade
and industry also demanded drastic changes in the 1940 Act. The Government of
India thought it necessary to provide a new forum and procedure for resolving
international and domestic disputes quickly.

Thus "The Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996"came into being. The law
relating to Arbitration and Conciliation is almost the same as in the advanced
countries. Conciliation has been given statutory recognition as a means for
settlement of the disputes in terms of this Act. In addition to this, the new Act also
guarantees independence and impartiality of the arbitrators irrespective of their
nationality. The new Act of 1996 brought in several changes to expedite the process
of arbitration. This legislation has developed confidence among foreign parties
interested to invest in India or to go for joint ventures, foreign investment, transfer of
technology and foreign collaborations. The advantage of ADR is that it is more
flexible and avoids seeking recourse to the courts. In conciliation/mediation, parties
are free to withdraw at any stage of time. It has been seen that resolution of disputes
is quicker and cheaper through ADR. The parties involved in ADR do not develop
strained relations; rather they maintain the continued relationship between
themselves.

Arbitration:
The process of arbitration can start only if there exists a valid Arbitration
Agreement between the parties prior to the emergence of the dispute. As per Section
7, such an agreement must be in writing. The contract, regarding which the dispute
exists, must either contain an arbitration clause or must refer to a separate document
signed by the parties containing the arbitration agreement. The existence of an
arbitration agreement can also be inferred by written correspondence such as letters,
telex, or telegrams which provide a record of the agreement. An exchange of
statement of claim and defence in which existence of an arbitration agreement is
alleged by one party and not denied by other is also considered as valid written
arbitration-agreement.

Any party to the dispute can start the process of appointing arbitrator and if
the other party does not cooperate, the party can approach the office of Chief Justice
for appointment of an arbitrator. There are only two grounds upon which a party can
challenge the appointment of an arbitrator – reasonable doubt in the impartiality of
the arbitrator and the lack of proper qualification of the arbitrator as required by the
arbitration agreement. A sole arbitrator or panels of arbitrators so appointed
constitute the Arbitration Tribunal. Except for some interim measures, there is very
little scope for judicial intervention in the arbitration process. The arbitration tribunal
has jurisdiction over its own jurisdiction. Thus, if a party wants to challenge the
jurisdiction of the arbitration tribunal, it can do so only before the tribunal itself. If the
tribunal rejects the request, there is little the party can do accept to approach a court
after the tribunal makes an award. Section 34 provides certain grounds upon which a
party can appeal to the principal civil court of original jurisdiction for setting aside the
award. Once the period for filing an appeal for setting aside an award is over, or if
such an appeal is rejected, the award is binding on the parties and is considered as
decree.

Conciliation
Conciliation is a less formal form of arbitration. This process does not require
an existence of any prior agreement. Any party can request the other party to
appoint a conciliator. One conciliator is preferred but two or three are also allowed. In
case of multiple conciliators, all must act jointly. If a party rejects an offer to conciliate,
there can be no conciliation. Parties may submit statements to the conciliator
describing the general nature of the dispute and the points at issue. Each party
sends a copy of the statement to the other. The conciliator may request further
details, may ask to meet the parties, or communicate with the parties orally or in
writing. Parties may even submit suggestions for the settlement of the dispute to the
conciliator. When it appears to the conciliator that elements of settlement exist, he
may draw up the terms of settlement and send it to the parties for their acceptance. If
both the parties sign the settlement document, it shall be final and binding on both.
Note that in USA, this process is similar to Mediation. However, in India, Mediation is
different from Conciliation and is a completely informal type of ADR mechanism.

Mediation
Mediation, a form of alternative dispute resolution (ADR) or "appropriate
dispute resolution", aims to assist two (or more) disputants in reaching an agreement.
The parties themselves determine the conditions of any settlements reached—
rather than accepting something imposed by a third party. The disputes may involve
(as parties) states, organizations, communities, individuals or other representatives
with a vested interest in the outcome. Mediators use appropriate techniques and/or
skills to open and/or improve dialogue between disputants, aiming to help the parties
reach an agreement (with concrete effects) on the disputed matter. Normally, all
parties must view the mediator as impartial. Disputants may use mediation in a
variety of disputes, such as commercial, legal, diplomatic, workplace, community and
family matters. A third-party representative may contract and mediate between (say)
unions and corporations. When a workers’ union goes on strike, a dispute takes
place, and the corporation hires a third party to intervene in attempt to settle a
contract or agreement between the union and the corporation.

Negotiation
Negotiation is a dialogue intended to resolve disputes, to produce an
agreement upon courses of action, to bargain for individual or collective advantage,
or to craft outcomes to satisfy various interests. It is the primary method of
alternative dispute resolution. Negotiation occurs in business, non-profit
organizations, government branches, legal proceedings, among nations and in
personal situations such as marriage, divorce, parenting, and everyday life. The
study of the subject is called negotiation theory. Those who work in negotiation
professionally are called negotiators. Professional negotiators are often specialized,
such as union negotiators, leverage buyout negotiators, peace negotiators, hostage
negotiators, or may work under other titles, such as diplomats, legislators or brokers

Lok Adalat:

“While Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 is a fairly standard western

approach towards ADR, the Lok Adalat system constituted under National Legal
Services Authority Act, 1987 is a uniquely Indian approach”. It roughly means
"People's court". India has had a long history of resolving disputes through the
mediation of village elders. The system of Lok Adalats is an improvement on that
and is based on Gandhian principles. This is a non-adversarial system, where by
mock courts (called Lok Adalats ) are held by the State Authority, District Authority,
Supreme Court Legal Services Committee, High Court Legal Services Committee, or
Taluk Legal Services Committee, periodically for exercising such jurisdiction as they
thinks fit. These are usually presided by retired judge, social activists, or members of
legal profession. It does not have jurisdiction on matters related to non-
compoundable offences. There is no court fee and no rigid procedural requirement
(i.e. no need to follow process given by Civil Procedure Code or Evidence Act),
which makes the process very fast. Parties can directly interact with the judge, which
is not possible in regular courts. Cases that are pending in regular courts can be
transferred to a Lok Adalat if both the parties agree.

A case can also be transferred to a Lok Adalat if one party applies to the
court and the court sees some chance of settlement after giving an opportunity of
being heard to the other party.The focus in Lok Adalats is on compromise. When no
compromise is reached, the matter goes back to the court. However, if a
compromise is reached, an award is made and is binding on the parties. It is
enforced as a decree of a civil court. An important aspect is that the award is final
and cannot be appealed, not even under Article 226 because it is a judgement by
consent. All proceedings of a Lok Adalat are deemed to be judicial proceedings and
every Lok Adalat is deemed to be a Civil Court. Lok Adalat (people’s courts),
established by the government, settles dispute through conciliation and compromise.

The First Lok Adalat was held in Chennai in 1986. Lok Adalat accepts the
cases which could be settled by conciliation and compromise and pending in the
regular courts within their jurisdiction.The Lok Adalat is presided over by a sitting or
retired judicial officer as the chairman, with two other members, usually a lawyer and
a social worker. There is no court fee. If the case is already filed in the regular court,
the fee paid will be refunded if the dispute is settled at the Lok Adalat. The
procedural laws and the Evidence Act are not strictly followed while assessing the
merits of the claim by the Lok Adalat.Main condition of the Lok Adalat is that both
parties in dispute should agree for settlement. The decision of the Lok Adalat is
binding on the parties to the dispute and its order is capable of execution through
legal process. No appeal lies against the order of the Lok Adalat. Lok Adalat is very
effective in settlement of money claims. Disputes like partition suits, damages and
matrimonial cases can also be easily settled before Lok Adalat as the scope for
compromise through an approach of give and take is high in these cases. Lok Adalat
is a boon to the litigant public, where they can get their disputes settled fast and free
of cost.
 CHAPTER – 2
PART - 1
THEORETICAL ASPECT OF LOK ADALATH
In every system of government, the effective justice delivery mechanism is a
permanent and necessary condition of peace, order, civilization and governance of
the country.

It is the primary duty of State to ensure equal and even handed justice for all by
regulating the dealings of citizens with one another, by checking disorder and high
handedness of one class of people over others and by maintaining all those rights
which are fundamental to the existence and upliftment of common man through
establishing the effective administration of justice.

But, in reality, the guarantee of equality before law does not provide any satisfaction
to a poor man due to lack of access to justice. The other reasons which affected
badly the administration of justice are delay, corruption, expensive litigation, non
access, less number of courts, judges and official staff, lengthy process and lack of
legal aid and legal awareness to the needy.

So in the light of these weaknesses of the existing judicial system, Lok Adalat has
been established.

Legislation pertaining to Lok Adalats

The advent of Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987 gave a statutory status to Lok
Adalats, pursuant to the constitutional mandate in Article 39-A of the Constitution of
India, contains various provisions for settlement of disputes through Lok Adalat.

It is an Act to constitute legal services authorities to provide free and competent legal
services to the weaker sections of the society to ensure that opportunities for
securing justice are not denied to any citizen by reason of economic or other
disabilities, and to organize Lok Adalats to secure that the operation of the legal
system promotes justice on a basis of equal opportunity.

Salient features of Lok Adalat

 It is based on settlement or compromise reached through systematic

negotiations.
  It is a win - win system where all the parties to the dispute have something to
gain.
 It is one among the Alternate Dispute Resolution (ADR) systems. It is an
alternative to "Judicial Justice".
 It is economical - No court fee is payable. If any court fee is paid, it will be
refunded.
 The parties to a dispute can interact directly with the presiding officer, which is
not possible in the case of a court proceeding.
 Lok Adalat is deemed to be civil court for certain purposes.
 Lok Adalat is having certain powers of a civil court.
 The award passed by the Lok Adalat is deemed to be a decree of a civil court.
 An award passed by the Lok Adalat is final and no appeal is maintainable
from it.
 An award passed by the Lok Adalat can be executed in a court.
 The award can be passed by Lok Adalat, only after obtaining the assent of all
the parties to dispute.
 Code of Civil Procedure and Indian Evidence Act are not applicable to the
proceedings of Lok Adalat.
 A Permanent Lok Adalat can pass an award on merits, even without the
consent of parties. Such an award is final and binding. From that no appeal is
possible.
 The appearance of lawyers on behalf of the parties, at the Lok Adalat is not
barred. (Regulation 39 of the Kerala State Legal Services Authority
Regulations, 1998.
 Levels and Composition of Lok Adalats
 At the State Authority Level

The Member Secretary of the State Legal Services Authority organizing the Lok
Adalat would constitute benches of the Lok Adalat, each bench comprising of a
sitting or retired judge of the High Court or a sitting or retired judicial officer and any
one or both of- a member from the legal profession; a social worker engaged in the
upliftment of the weaker sections and interested in the implementation of legal
services schemes or programmes.
At High Court Level

The Secretary of the High Court Legal Services Committee would constitute benches
of the Lok Adalat, each bench comprising of a sitting or retired judge of the High
Court and any one or both of- a member from the legal profession; a social worker
engaged in the upliftment of the weaker sections and interested in the
implementation of legal services schemes or programmes.

At District Level

The Secretary of the District Legal Services Authority organizing the Lok Adalat
would constitute benches of the Lok Adalat, each bench comprising of a sitting or
retired judicial officer and any one or both of either a member from the legal
profession; and/or a social worker engaged in the upliftment of the weaker sections
and interested in the implementation of legal services schemes or programmes or a
person engaged in para-legal activities of the area, preferably a woman.

At Taluk Level

The Secretary of the Taluk Legal Services Committee organizing the Lok Adalat
would constitute benches of the Lok Adalat, each bench comprising of a sitting or
retired judicial officer and any one or both of either a member from the legal
profession; and/or a social worker engaged in the upliftment of the weaker sections
and interested in the implementation of legal services schemes or programmes or a
person engaged in para-legal activities of the area, preferably a woman.

National Lok Adalat

National Level Lok Adalats are held for at regular intervals where on a single day Lok
Adalats are held throughout the country, in all the courts right from the Supreme
Court till the Taluk Levels wherein cases are disposed off in huge numbers.

Permanent Lok Adalat

The other type of Lok Adalat is the Permanent Lok Adalat, organized under Section
22-B of The Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987. Permanent Lok Adalats have been
set up as permanent bodies with a Chairman and two members for providing
compulsory pre-litigative mechanism for conciliation and settlement of cases relating
to Public Utility Services like transport, postal, telegraph etc. Here, even if the parties
fail to reach to a settlement, the Permanent Lok Adalat gets jurisdiction to decide the
dispute, provided, the dispute does not relate to any offence. Further, the Award of
the Permanent Lok Adalat is final and binding on all the parties. The jurisdiction of
the Permanent Lok Adalats is upto Rs. Ten Lakhs. Here if the parties fail to reach to
a settlement, the Permanent Lok Adalat has the jurisdiction to decide the case. The
award of the Permanent Lok Adalat is final and binding upon the parties. The Lok
Adalat may conduct the proceedings in such a manner as it considers appropriate,
taking into account the circumstances of the case, wishes of the parties like requests
to hear oral statements, speedy settlement of dispute etc.

Mobile Lok Adalats

They are also organized in various parts of the country which travel from one
location to another to resolve disputes in order to facilitate the resolution of disputes
through this mechanism

Benefits of Lok Adalat

The benefits that litigants derive through the Lok Adalats are many.

a) First, there is no court fee and even if the case is already filed in the regular court,
the fee paid will be refunded if the dispute is settled at the Lok Adalat.

b) Secondly, there is no strict application of the procedural laws and the Evidence
Act while assessing the merits of the claim by the Lok Adalat. The parties to the
disputes though represented by their advocate can interact with the Lok Adalat judge
directly and explain their stand in the dispute and the reasons therefore, which is not
possible in a regular court of law.

c) Thirdly, disputes can be brought before the Lok Adalat directly instead of going to
a regular court first and then to the Lok Adalat.

d) Fourthly, the decision of the Lok Adalat is binding on the parties to the dispute and
its order is capable of execution through legal process. No appeal lies against the
order of the Lok Adalat whereas in the regular law courts there is always a scope to
appeal to the higher forum on the decision of the trial court, which causes delay in
the settlement of the dispute finally. The reason being that in a regular court,
decision is that of the court but in Lok Adalat it is mutual settlement and hence no
case for appeal will arise. In every respect the scheme of Lok Adalat is a boon to the
litigant public, where they can get their disputes settled fast and free of cost.

e) Last but not the least, faster and inexpensive remedy with legal status.

It is a perception that Lok Adalats is not considered to be a court in its conventional

sense i.e. it does not adjudicate on facts by the application of law but on the contrary
it encourages the parties to solve their disputes using other means such as
conciliation to reach an amicable settlement which gets crystallized into the award of
the Lok Adalat. Based upon the Gandhian Principles, Lok Adalat is one of the most
important components of the ADR system operating in India.

The Judge of the Lok Adalat plays an evaluative and a suggestive role and helps the
parties to negotiate and reach a mutual and an acceptable settlement. The whole
emphasis in Lok Adalat proceedings is on conciliation rather than adjudication and
the entire process is based on effective and active participation and negotiation
between the parties.

Lok Adalats gained a lot of popularity during the 1980’s and was therefore granted a
statutory recognition by mandating Article 39 of the Constitution of India which
ultimately led to the enactment of the Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987 on
November 9th 1995. Justice at Lok Adalats are provided by giving both the parties
an equal opportunity to secure their position. Principles of ‘audi alterem partem
hence, natural justice is duly followed before passing any order.

Permanent Lok Adalats

Unlike any other courts or tribunals, Permanent Lok Adalats works on a regular basis
for permanent dispute resolution. However, the Legal Services Authorities Act was
amended in the year 2002 and the chapter pertaining to Permanent Lok Adalats was
inserted.

To be the Chairman of the Permanent Lok Adalat, one must be a District Judge or an
Additional District Judge or has held a judicial office higher in rank than that of a
District Judge. Two other persons having adequate experience in public utility
services are also appointed by the government.
The jurisdiction of the Permanent Lok Adalats can only be invoked at pre-litigation
stage by making an application to the Permanent Lok Adalat for the settlement of the
dispute. Once, the jurisdiction has been invoked, the parties cannot take a recourse
before a court of law. However, the jurisdiction of Permanent Lok Adalats does not
relate to any non-compoundable offence or where the value of the property in
dispute exceeds Ten Lakhs. Permanent Lok Adalats cannot take cognizance of a
matter which is already sub-judice in a court of law.

A permanent Lok Adalat can direct the parties to produce any sort of evidence or any
other documents, if the case requires to be before it while conduction a conciliation
proceeding. It also must follow the principles of natural justice, fair play and equity,
and is not bound by the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 and The Indian Evidence Act,
1872.

Where the parties reach an agreement on the settlement of the dispute, they have to
sign the settlement agreement and the Permanent Lok Adalat then passes an award
in terms thereof and must furnish a copy of the agreement to each of the parties
concerned. The idea of a Lok Adalat and a permanent Lok Adalat clearly differs here.
Where the parties fail to reach a settlement or if the dispute does not relate to any
offence, then the matter is decided based upon the merits of the case. Thus,
Permanent Lok Adalats have a residuary jurisdiction, in addition to the jurisdiction
enjoyed by the Lok-Adalats, to decide the dispute by virtue of Section 22 C (8), even
if the parties have failed to resolve the dispute after conciliation.

The award of a permanent Lok Adalat is final and binding upon the parties and on
every such person claiming under them and the same is deemed to be a degree of a
civil court. No appeal lies against the judgement of the Permanent Lok Adalat and
hence, the award is final. The award shall, however, be made by a majority of the
members constituting the Permanent Lok Adalat.

Permanent Lok Adalats as an ADR Mechanism

The classification of the Permanent Lok Adalats as an ADR mechanism has always
been in question and much clarification hasn’t been provided with respect to it. In
State of Punjab v. Jalour Singh The Supreme Court held that such type of Lok
Adalats only have a conciliatory role and the award of the Lok Adalats does not
mean and imply any form of an independent verdict or an opinion derived out of the
decision-making process.

The second question that comes within the ambit of questioning is whether the
concept of Lok Adalats co-exists with this judgement of the Supreme Court. In State
of Punjab v. Jalour Singh, the Supreme Court was dealing with an issue involving a
Lok Adalat within the definition and the ambit of Sections 19, 20, 21 and 22 of the
Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987. The Permanent Lok Adalats in contradistinction
to Lok Adalats have been expressly conferred as an adjudicatory role by the
statute. When a matter, at a Permanent Lok Adalat cannot be settled by means of
conciliation, it is then statutorily enjoined to decide the dispute of its merit. Therefore,
the judgement laid down in the said case, does not apply with Permanent Lok
Adalats as because the court was not at all considering the provision as enshrined
under Section 22 C (8) of the Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987.

Moreover, as soon as the amendments were made to the Legal Services Authorities
Act, 1987, they were challenged, but were upheld by the Supreme Court of India.

In Life Insurance Corporation of India v. Suresh Kumar The Supreme Court

observed that permanent lok Adalats have no jurisdiction over matters wherein the
parties failed to eventually come to a reasonable settlement. However, if we closely
look pon this case, Supreme Court has not considered applying Section 19 of the
Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987 which states that “Continuous Lok Adalats”
sometimes are loosely described as “Permanent Lok Adalats” and this shouldn’t be
confused with that of Section 22 B (1) of the same Act. Further, the position was
itself clarified by the Supreme Court itself in the case of InterGlobe Aviation Ltd. v. N.
Satchidanand that a Permanent Lok Adalat has the right to decide the case upon the
merits if the parties are unable to reach an amicable situation. The Supreme Court
passed a ruling saying that the Parliament has given the authority to the Permanent
Lok Adalats to decide the matters upon its merit and therefore it has an adjudicatory
role to play.

Hence, it is said that the dispute resolution through the system of Permanent Lok
Adalats is an ADR mechanism which is hybrid in nature, and has both adjudicatory
and non-adjudicatory trappings that offers a substitute to conventional system of
litigation and makes the public free from the system of complexity and rigidity. A
permanent Lok Adalat is a special tribunal which is not a court and its decision is not
subjected to successive appeals.

Hence, the dispute resolution through permanent lok Adalats is definitely an ADR
mechanism and a person who is submitting into this form of conciliation is said to be
aware of the law that if in case the dispute is not amicably resolved, the Permanent
Lok Adalat would acquire an adjudicatory role.

In practice, the Permanent Lok Adalats have similar benefits to that of a normal Lok
Adalat and they suffer from the same disadvantages as well. However, the
permanent Lok Adalats functions continuously and they require an additional and a
separate expenditure. They provide us with an additional state owned conciliation
mechanism with the capacity and the time to deal with a much greater number of
complex cases than that of the ordinary Lok Adalats.
 PART – A

AS A PART OF OUR CURRICULAM WE HAVE TO ATTEND A LOK ADALATH FOR WHICH WE WERE

DIVIDED INTO GROUPS AND WE ATTENDED THE MEGA LOK ADALATH HELD BY DISTRCIT LEGAL

SERVICE AUTHOURITY THIRUVANANTHAPURAM AT TRIVANDRUM ADR CENTER ON 9TH FEBRUARY.

2019 .THE FOLLOWING CASES ARE SETTLED THROUGH MEDIATION IN THERE

ADALAT PROCEEDING 1

BEFORE THE DISTRICT LEGAL SERVICE AUTHORITY

TRIVANDRUM

P.L CASE NO 26376 OF 2018

NAME OF JUDICIAL OFFICER :P.D DHARMARAJAN

NAME OF MEMBER : MUFAIDA

BETWEEN

Central Bank Of India Petitioner

Malayinkil Branch

AND

Mr.Sree kantan Nair M Respondent

Smt.Nirmala kumara

Branch Manager, Central Bank ,Malayinkil Branch

Details

Petition filed for repayment of money which amount Rs 85000/-.Both parties

were present for settling the respective amount .

The settlement was paying 85000/- the installment basis which will pay on monthly
basis .the entire amount will pay before on 31/3/2019 .In default the bank authority
can initiate proceedings against the respondent for the entire loan amount with
interest. The respondent paid Rs.20000 now itself
It was final verdict, No appeal prefer in this case

File closed ,The respective settlement is signed by the both the parties.

ADALAT PROCEEDING 2

P.L CASE No: 26386 of 2018

NAME OF JUDICIAL OFFICER :SHRI . THAHA

NAME OF MEMBER : ADV DEEPA S.K

BETWEEN

Central Bank Of India Petitioner

Malayinkil Branch

And M Sanky T.N Respondent

Details

Subject matter ; Educational loan repayment

Here the respondent had taken educational loan from Central Bank Malyinkil
Branch .The respondent was under the BPL category ,he need to get subsidy from
the loan amount .The total loan amount was 654000 which had taken in the year of
2016The respondent paid Rs 10000 was the part of revenue recovery .

Here the matter settled for Rs 400000. The both the parties
assented the settlement the respondent should pay Rs 100000 for each month .The
principal amount should pay on or before 31st march 2019.Respondent pays Rs
50000 now itself.In default the bank can initiate proceeding against respondent

File closed
 ADALAT PROCEEDING 3

P.L 7612 /2018

NAME OF JUDICIAL OFFICER :RAJIV JAYARAJ

NAME OF MEMBER : JULIEE .S

Thankaraj zen v, KSFE (assistant Manager )

KSFE filed a petition against guarantor who made default of 264000.here total
outstanding Rs.536000 .Here the principal debtor thankaraj zen had been taken loan
from K..S.F.E from 2016

The decree was 438000 was be settled.Rs 50000 will pay within 31 st January 2019
as a down payment .

ADALAT PROCEEDING 4

P.L CASE NO 26386/2018

NAME OF JUDICIAL OFFICER :P.D DHARMARAJAN

NAME OF MEMBER : MUFAIDA

Petitioner – Central Bank Of India, malayinkil branch, trivandrum

Respondent – Mr T N SANKY,thekkankara, anthiyoorkonam, trivandrum

Respondent availed loan of Rs 4,00,000/- from the petitioner/bank after

executing necessary documents.Both parties heard and matter settled ,the
respondent will pay the said amount befor 31/03/2019 in for instalments.respondent
pays Rs 50000/-now itself. In default ,the bank can proceed against the respondent
for the remaining loan amount.

Dispute settled

File closed
 ADALAT PROCEEDING 5

PLCASE NO 26390/2018

NAME OF JUDICIAL OFFICER :P.D DHARMARAJAN

NAME OF MEMBER : MUFAIDA

Petitioner – Central Bank Of India,malayinkil branch,trivandrum

Respondent – Mr Vinvent N,V.V House ,Eruthavoor,Ruselpuram P o,

Malayinkil, Trivandrum

Respondent availed loan of Rs 3,08,000/- from the petitioner/bank

after executing necessary documents.

Both parties heard and matter settled ,the respondent will pay the said amount
before 25/03/2019.respondent pays Rs 5000/-now itself. In default ,the bank can
proceed against the respondent for the remaining loan amount.

Dispute settled

File closed
 PART-B
CLIENT INTERVIEW

The client interview assessment is all about your face-to-face customer

service skills under the watchful gaze of the professional conduct rules. You are
expected to conduct an interview with a ‘client’ in order to obtain and convey the
information required without stepping outside of what you know or can do. The
information you obtain should be enough for you to take the next steps without going
back to the client for more. What you tell the client should cover off your professional
conduct and give a little advice regarding their situation.

The interview will be based in an area of law; for me, it was probate. You will be
expected to know enough about the law to be able to obtain the salient facts from the
client. You may also have been given some preparatory information to guide you
towards the correct advice to give.

However, the small amount of advice you will give is second to the professional
conduct skills. It is likely to be the first interview with the client (the least amount of
background and legal knowledge required), which means there is a lot of
professional conduct stuff to be covered.

Importance of client interview

Client interviewing is one of the easier practical skills; after all, it is only a
conversation. However, it is often one of the exams that students get most nervous
about. Being put in front of a client and told to think on the spot is quite daunting;
especially if this is the first time you will be speaking in person to a customer. It is
also a little of the unknown – your provider is likely to use an actor to play the part of
the client for the exam and the unfamiliar face can put people off. It is easy to get
caught up in the legal aspects of the advice you will be giving and all the theory
of what makes a good interview and to forget that in fact it is just that, a conversation.

A quick tip regarding interviewing styles, which if you haven’t heard of already, you
will do by the time you qualify: open and closed questioning. Open questions allow
more than one word answers, for example: ‘What happened?’, ‘Could you explain a
little of the background please?’, ‘How can I help today?’ Closed questions allow
very limited answers, even down to just a yes or no, such as: ‘What date did it
happen?’, ‘Where do you live?’, ‘Do you have insurance?’ Open questions are good
to get the client talking and to get the conversation flowing whereas closed questions
get the details out. A good interview technique is to start with open questions and
slowly narrow down to closed until you have the information you need.

A really important tip for good interview technique: ask open questions

If you go down a line of questions that doesn’t go anywhere, back up and ask a more
open question. It’s fairly easy to say but can be quite difficult in practice, especially
when you are aware you need to get certain bits of information to provide advice. It is
worth knowing that there is a piece of information that the client will be instructed to
give you only if it comes out through your questioning. If you ask only closed
questions, it is unlikely you will ask the right one for it to come out; you need some
open questions for the client to talk his way into giving it away.

In my opinion, the best way to conquer the nerves and to get everything you need is
to have a good handle on what is going to happen. Yes, you can’t control what your
client is going to say but it is your interview, so it can be guided in whatever way you
wish. Having a planned structure to the conversation will help you get what you need,
control the client to what you need them to say.

Structure of client interview

1. Introduce yourself and explain a little about what will happen during the interview:
‘I am going to ask you a few questions about the situation to get some information
about the background. I may take some notes while you talk, please don’t worry.’
Explain the stages of the interview. This puts the client at ease and helps you take
control. You could even offer the client a cup of tea or a drink.

2. Ask the general questions – name, address, contact details. You might have been
given this already, but you should check it is correct. There are two reasons for this –
one for accuracy and the other to check you are speaking to the right person. This
also leads into the interview nicely and gives you a chance to calm down before
getting on to the meat of the interview.
3. Ask some easy, open questions about the situation. Explain what you know: ‘You
explained to my supervisor on the phone that x has happened. I would be grateful if
you could just take me through it again.’ Try to let the client talk, you can go back
and ask questions when they have finished. Keep asking open questions until it
seems like they have finished. Take notes of everything (not verbatim!).

4. Go back and clarify any details you need to with closed questions – have the
legal aspects in the back of your mind when you are thinking about this. Ask if the
client has any paperwork he could bring in, if applicable.

5. Ask the most important question – ‘Is there anything else that might be relevant
you could tell me?’ This question should allow him to tell you that bit of information
he is keeping back if you have missed it earlier.

6. Give your advice. Try to stick to only that which you can be certain of. You can
always clarify what you are saying in the following way: ‘I think x but I will clarify with
my supervisor and get back to you as soon as possible.’ If you have gone blank, just
say ‘I will ask my supervisor about that and get back to you.’

7. Confirm the next steps – both for you and the client. You will likely have to
discuss with your supervisor and confirm your advice in writing by the end of the
week – either by letter or by email. Your client might have paperwork to bring in
(remember money laundering – passport and proof of address) or a piece of
information to confirm to you. If he doesn’t have anything to do, tell him that you will
get in touch with him and will let him know then the next steps.

8. Ask ‘Is there anything else I can help you with today?’ Hopefully nothing, but it’s
one last chance for him to tell you something he hasn’t already. If not, it’s a good
way of ending the interview.

This structure is easy to follow and should elicit all the information you need. Try not
to script yourself; it will be easy to spot if you are rehearsed and you will be lost if
something unexpected happens. However, it is worth a bit of advanced planning.
You can take some paper in with you to take notes with – if you write your key
questions on here in advance, it will remind you but also will allow you to take fewer
notes, e.g. if you have written ‘date of birth’ already, you will only need to write the
actual date in the interview. Similarly, a good attendance note will have the date,
attendees, time, file number etc. You will know this in advance; why not get it down
before you go in.

There will be some client care issues, some which could catch you out and you
should try to cover them all, should they arise:

You are a trainee. You should let the client know your position and that you are
being supervised, ideally at the start of the interview. This isn’t difficult to slip in; ‘My
name is X. I am a trainee in the X department. I understand you spoke to my
supervisor, Mr X, earlier in the week about…’

Costs.

You will get brownie points if you cover this element in any interview but it is
important to raise in an initial interview. I would suggest one of three approaches: 1.
You confirm your supervisor has already discussed the costs; 2. This is a free 30
minute interview and if the client wishes to proceed, your supervisor will discuss
costs then; or 3. The client has been sent a client care letter setting out costs and
you confirm he is happy to proceed on that basis. Any one of these allows you to
raise costs without actually talking figures – mention of numbers will get you into a
tricky area, for instance, do you mean per hour, or flat fee? Is that for your time or
your supervisor’s or both? Is it excluding or including VAT? Is it just for your fees or
are the disbursements included? It is much easier not to get into that territory in the
first place.

Client

This is a curve-ball professional conduct issue that happens quite a lot in practice;
the ‘client’ comes in but it turns out he is there on behalf of his mother, who is too old
to come in herself. I am not sure if this will happen in the interview assessment, as it
is a little harsh. However, you should be prepared and if it is the case, you should
close down the interview and explain you need to speak to the mother herself. You
can only take instructions from the client direct and shouldn’t discuss matters with
third parties unless you have express permission. If the ‘client’ claims he has
permission, explain you will need to check with your supervisor first and that you are
under a duty of confidentiality. You may be able to safely provide generic advice
about process, e.g. what happens in probate, but don’t give anything specific.
Managing client expectations

. This is a biggie – the client should know when he leaves the interview room what
you are going to do, what he needs to do and how long the next step will take. It is
very important you are clear who is going to contact who next and you must be
certain about anything the client needs to do before you next contact them.

Ability.

You shouldn’t give any advice you are not competent to give, i.e. don’t bullshit. If
you don’t know something say you will have to check with your supervisor, don’t try
to bluff. Admitting you don’t know is much better than getting it wrong. You will lose
marks for bad advice.

Conflicts.

If it is an initial interview, it may be that you will need to do conflict checks before
you proceed to act for the client. This should have been done before you meet for
the first time but it might be that information hasn’t yet been provided to you. If you
come across a situation where a conflict might arise, you should close the interview
down and explain you need to carry out a conflict check before going any further. If
they ask why, explain that you may already act for the other party and will be under a
duty to them. You could pretend to ask your secretary to run a conflict check that
comes back clear and then continue with the interview if you wish or simply say that
you will call the client later on to continue once the checks have been run. Again I
am not sure if this will come up during the assessment but you should be prepared
for everything.

The thing to remember is that you have only a few boxes to tick and you are not
being graded on your knowledge of the law. I know from experience that you can tick
all the boxes without being a walking dictionary.

Preparation is key for the interview –

having your thoughts clear about what you need to ask and what is going to happen
will really help you to get through the conversation. In practice, trainees attend
interviews but don’t conduct them so they are not expecting miracles. That’s not to
say the skills aren’t used – they come very handy on the phone to clients – it’s just
that you are unlikely to be put in the situation again any time soon.

The thing to remember is that you have only a few boxes to tick and you are not
being graded on your knowledge of the law. I know from experience that you can tick
all the boxes without being a walking dictionary. My interview scenario was that the
client’s aunt had died, the client was named executor under the will and some of the
named beneficiaries were dead. Most of my year worked out whether the will was
valid and who should benefit, etc. and gave quite detailed advice relating to probate
law. My friend asked if the funeral had been held yet (it hadn’t), told the client that
money from the aunt’s bank account could be released to pay for it, that the will
could wait a week for him to be with his family and that she would give him a ring in
10 days to arrange another meeting. In and out in five minutes with full marks. Just
goes to show that it is your skills that are being assessed, not you demonstrating
your knowledge of law!
 QUESTIONNAIRE

CLIENT INTERVIEW

Questionnaire for study the knowledge and response of litigant over the lok
adalath experience

QUESTIONNAIRE

PART –A

CLIENT DETAILS

CLIENT NAME :- MOHAMMED ABDUL RASHEED

Case number :- PL NO 976/2019

Age :- 58 YEARS

Type of litigation :- RECOVERY OF DUES LAPSED OVER LOAN

Client address : MOHAMMED ABDUL RASHEED

S/O M.SHEHABBAKANNU,AGED 58 YEARS ,

FATHIMA BUILDING ,VIZHINJAM P.O ,

TRIVANDRUM

QUESTIONNAIRE

PART –BA

SUBJECTIVE RESPONSE

 ARE YOU A -------------- IN THIS LITIGATION?

o PLAINTIFF
o DEFENDENT

 IS THIS LOK ADALATH A NEW EXPERIENCE FOR YOU ?

o YES
o NO
 ARE YOU HAPPY WITH THIS LOK ADALATH?
o YES
o O
 DO YOU THINK LOK ADALATH PROVIDES YOU ,YOUR JUSTICE ?
o YES
o NO

 DO YOU HAVE A PRIOR KNOWLEDGE OVER LOK ADALATH MECHANISAMS?

o YES
o NO

 CAN YOU HELP US WITH OUR QUESTIONS REGARDING LOK ADALATH?

o YES
o NO

PART –BB

DISCRIPTIVE RESPONSE

 CAN YOU EXPLAIN YOUR CASE , AND CIRCUMSTANCES WHICH BROUGHT YOU HERE?

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------

 DO YOU THINK LOK ADALATH IS AS A EFFECTIVE MECHANISAM IN SOLVING

LITIGATION AND BROUGHT JUSTICE TO THE PARTIES?

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- --------

 DO YOU CONSIDER LOK ADALATH TO BE SPPEDY COURT OF JUSTICE AND WILL YOU
RECOMMEND THIS MECHANISM TO OTHER FOR SPEEDY JUSTICE?

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------

 DO YOU THINK LOK ADALATH AS A COST EFFICENT MECHANISM ADAPTABLE ONE

FOR COMMON PEOPLE?

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 WHAT ARE THE REASONS WHICH YOU THINK LOK ADALATH CANNOT BE CONSIDERED
A JUSTICEFUL MANNER?

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------
 CAN YOU EXPLAIN THE PROCEDURE YOU HAVE GONE THROUGH WHILE IN LOK
ADALATH?

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------

 DO YOU THINK YOU GET REASONABLE CHANCE TO EXPLAIN YOUR SIDE CONTENTION?

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 WHETHER THE CASE REFFERING TO LOK ADALATH IS BY COURT ORDER OR OVER

YOUR APPLICATION ?

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- --------

 DO YOU THINK LOK ADALATH SYSTEM SHOULD BE ELABORATED MORE IN OUR STATE?

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------

 DO YOU WISH TO PROVIDE ANY OTHER DETAILS ,WE FAILDE TO ASK REGARDING THE
LOK ADALATH?

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ -

*-
 QUESTIONNAIRE

ADVOCATE’S INTERVIEW

Questionnaire for study the importance and characteristics of lok adalth

through advocate’s interview

QUESTIONNAIRE

PART –A

ADVOCATE’S DETAILS

Advocates’s name:- Adv. S.Bindhu krishnaa

ROLL number :- K-485/12

Place of practise :- Nedumangad

Years of practise:- 07 years

Official address : Adv . S .Bindhu krishnaa

Law and Justice Chambers

Nedumangad , Sub Court

Opposite Nedumangad Bus stand

Nedumangad Thiruvananthapuram

695562

QUESTIONNAIRE

PART –BA

SUBJECTIVE RESPONSE

 ARE YOU A PRACTISING LAYWER?

o YES
o NO

 ARE YOU AN EXPERIENCED ADVOCATE IN LOK ADALTH MATTERS?

o YES
o NO
 DO YOU CAME HERE WITH RESPECT TO ANY CASE IN LOK ADALATH?
o YES
o NO

 HAVE TO CAME HERE BEFORE WITH RELATED TO ANY OTHER CASES?

o YES
o NO

 DO YOU HAVE A STRONG KNOWLEDGE BASE OVER LOK ADALATH MECHANISAMS?

o YES
o NO

 CAN YOU HELP US WITH OUR QUESTIONS REGARDING LOK ADALATH?

o YES
o NO

PART –BB

DISCRIPTIVE RESPONSE

 CAN YOU EXPLAIN LOK ADALTH SYSTEM AND DO YOU THINK LOK ADALATH AS A
BETTER JUDICIAL MECHANISAM?

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------

 DO YOU THINK LOK ADALATH IS AS A EFFECTIVE MECHANISAM IN SOLVING

LITIGATION AND BROUGHT JUSTICE TO THE PARTIES?

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- --------

 DO YOU CONSIDER LOK ADALATH TO BE AS A REMEDY FOR INCREASING CASE

FILINGS IN COURTS AND THUSM EASEN THE BURDEN OF COURTS?

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------

 DO YOU THINK LOK ADALATH AS A COST EFFICENT MECHANISM AND WHAT ARE THE
ADVANTAGES OF LOK ADALATH?

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------
 WHY ARE PEOPLE UNAWARE OF THIS MECHANISAM ,WHICH IS MUCH MORE COST
EFFICENT AND SPPEDY SYSTEM?

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 WHY IS THE IMPORTANCE OF LOK ADALATH HAS NOT REACHED TO THE NOTICE OF
PEOPLE?

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- --------

 DO YOU THINK LITIGANTS ARE GEETING REASONABLE JUSTICE IN THIS MECHANISM?

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 WHETHER THE CASE REFFERING TO LOK ADALATH HAS INCREASED?

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 DO YOU THINK LOK ADALATH SYSTEM SHOULD BE ELABORATED MORE IN OUR STATE
AND WHAT ARE THE DISADVANTAGES OF LOK ADALATH?

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------

 DO YOU WISH TO PROVIDE ANY OTHER DETAILS ,WE FAILDE TO ASK REGARDING THE
LOK ADALATH?

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 CONCLUSION

Due to the increasing costs to pay for litigation and the growth of court congestion,
individuals as well as whole companies slowly but steadily are starting to turn to
alternative dispute resolution in order to solve their disputes. The term “ADR” stands
for the set of methods by means of which legal conflicts and various disputes are
solved outside the courtroom. Usually ADR is less formal than litigation, but it does
include the presence of the third party to preside over the hearing between the two
disputing parties. It is also less expensive and not so time-consuming.

The specialists working at the Centre for Effective Dispute Resolution (CEDR) gave
the following definition to the term ADR: “A body of dispute resolution techniques
which avoid the inflexibility of litigation and arbitration, and focus instead on enabling
the parties to achieve a better or similar result, with the minimum of direct and
indirect cost” . As it has been mentioned above there are different methods used in
ADR, and each of them possesses certain characteristics. However, it is possible to
identify certain characteristics that are peculiar to the whole process of ADR. The
first characteristic feature of ADR is that it deals with all disputes confidentially,
meaning that process of dispute resolution and its outcomes are usually kept in
secret unless it falls under certain circumstances when it has to be revealed by a
special law.

ADR is more flexible than usual litigation. It leaves the room for creativity and
cooperation in order come to a common solution and to meet the requirements of
both parties. ADR gives a possibility to gain more control over the process of dispute
resolution. It involves personal communication of all parties, who might be working or
living together after the process ends. Thus, it maintains the existing relationship, by
using methods that encourage people to cooperate in order to reach an agreement.
Often it leads to the improvement of relationship and elimination of further conflicts.
ADR establishes certain rules that govern the process of dispute solving. Methods of
ADR involve third parties’ presence, so-called neutrals.

Generally, the process of ADR is not so expensive in comparison with litigation, and
it is shorter in time as court proceedings are much more complex. ADR grants a
feeling of personal satisfaction to the parties, as they take a more active part in the
process and can decide themselves, which method of ADR to use. ADR helps to
reach the compromise between the parties, while litigation results only in satisfaction
of one party. And the last characteristic feature is the following, by means of ADR it
is possible to get to the root of a problem due to the use of personal approach. In
ADR the decision-making is the responsibility of the disputing parties or the neutral.
Though ADR has many obvious advantages as compared to usual litigation, there
are some cases, which cannot be solved by means of ADR.

For example, the cases of violence, when courts are able to provide better protection
for victims of violence, or the cases when one of the parties possess two much
power. Also, ADR is improper when “one of the parties wants the issue to be
publicized or wants the outcome to be seen as an example for other similar
disputes” . Such a desire goes against usual practice of ADR. ADR cannot be used
as the means of dispute resolution, when the outcome may influence a great number
of people, “where there is a need to establish precedent” and “where a definite and
broadly applicable solution is required”. Court proceedings are more effective for
above mentioned cases.

As it can be seen from the information provided above, there are various methods
used to resolve disputes between people. Nowadays, court proceedings are very
time-consuming and expensive, which makes the people look for something
alternative. Alternative Dispute Resolution and its methods appear to be an effective
means of resolving disputes. These methods are less expensive, confidential and
not so time-consuming; and they get much closer to the root of problems that need
to be solved. Besides, the main goal of the majority of types of ADR is to improve
relationship between the disputing parties, to help them reach an agreement. This is
what distinguishes ADR methods from usual litigation. There can be only one
winning party after a court trial, while after conciliation, mediation or negotiation all
parties can be considered as winning, because there is no conflict between them any
more.

Objective of Lok Adalat is to settle the disputes which are pending before the courts,
by negotiations, conciliation and by adopting persuasive common sense and human
approach to the problems of the disputants.The system has received laurels from the
parties involved in particular and the public and the legal functionaries, in general. It
also helps in emergence of jurisprudence of peace in the larger interest of justice
and wider sections of society. Its process is voluntary and works on the principle that
both parties to the disputes are willing to sort out their disputes by amicable solutions.
Through this mechanism, disputes can be settled in a simpler, quicker and cost-
effective way at all the three stages i.e. pre-litigation, pending-litigation and post-
litigation.

India has to be a venue for international arbitrations. New trends in litigation, such as
those related to intellectual property rights, cyber crimes, environment, money
laundering, competition, telecom, taxation, international arbitration and so on need
expertise. This could be possible only by providing proper training to the judges of
lok adalat. Establishing separate permanent and continuous lok adalats for
government departments, statutory authorities and public sector undertakings for
disposal of pending cases as well as disputes at pre-litigation stage, which is not yet
done.

Though this measure is thought to been taken up by the NALSA in the year 1998 but
yet not implemented. So the same must be brought into picture as soon as possible.
More over, there has to be more creation of awareness to Legal Aid Schemes and
programmes under it. Lok Adalats are certainly a big boon to the present judicial
system. However lots of work needs to be done in this sphere. More discipline must
be brought into the present system. For instance, since December 2005, over 2000
applications have been filed with the lok adalat of the Andaman and Nicobar Islands.
Less than 100 cases have been disposed off till date.

The claims filed with the lok adalats pertain to inadequate compensation for loss of
crop, land, livestock, boats and ancillary equipments, life, disability and small-scale
businesses. Also the relief packages are being interpreted contrary to the spirit of the
law, depriving most poor people of basic means of sustenance to restore their
livelihood. Also the ambit of the lok adalat must be widened for speedier disposal of
more cases. The provision of consent must be done away with if the matter is a
perfect case to be referred to the lok adalat. Such a step will bring in more disputes
to the lok adalat for the speedy disposal of the matter.

Finally, the awards of the lok adalats must be given precedent value for similar
disputes brought forward in the lok adalats. It is because the awards given by the
lok Adalats are final and in nature as no appeal may be preferred against such an
award. Therefore, it is humbly submitted that if such steps are taken by the eminent
lawmakers of our country then we sincerely feel that it would drastically bring down
the number of pending cases in our country and would provide speedy justice to
everyone as ‘justice delayed is justice denied’.