THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED and THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.G. SHANKAR WRIT PETITION No.13495 of 20009 Between: P. Srinivasa Rao Petitioners (S) AND .....RESPONDENT(S) THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED and THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.G. SHANKAR WRIT PETITION No.13495 of 2009 ORDER: (per Sri KGS, J ) The petitioners seeks for Writ of Certiorari for setting aside the award of the 5th respondent Lok Adalat Bench at Vijayawada in LA NO.557 of 2008 in O.S.No.2072 of 2007 on the file of the II Additional Junior Civil Judge, Vijayawada. The writ petitioners purchased property from the defendants in O.S.No.198 of 1984 on the file of the Senior Civil Judge, Nuzividu through two sale deeds in the year 1990. Respondents 1 and 2 allegedly acted as identifying witnesses in the two sale deeds. Subsequently, the respondents 1 and 2 sold part of the property to the respondent no.4, after a compromise was entered into between the respondents 1 and 2 on one side and respondent no.3 on the other side in O.S.No.2072 of 2007 on the file of the II Additional Junior Civil Judge, Vijayawada. O.S.No.223 of 1980 was a suit laid by Venkata Krishnaiah against the father of the respondents 1 and 2. It was a suit for specific performance of the agreement of sale. ( It may be noticed at this stage that the respondents 1 and 2 are the sons of the second wife of their father Chalapathi Rao). O.S.No.223 of 1980 was later transferred to Nuzividu and was numbered as O.S.No.184 of 1984. Ultimately the said suit was decreed in the year 1986. While things stood thus, the defendants in O.S.No.184 of 1984 executed the two sale deeds referred to by the writ petitioners in favour of the writ petitioners on 31-7-1990. An appeal was filed and was numbered as A.S.No.48 of 1986, on the file of the II Additional District Judge, Vijayawada. In A.S.NO.48 of 1986 a compromise was struck between Venkata Krishnaiah, plaintiff in O.S.No.223 of 1980 and Chalapathi Rao, father the respondents 1 and 2 herein. However, the grand son of Venkata Krishnaiah laid an execution petition suppressing the fact of compromise of A.S.No.48 of 1986. In the meanwhile, respondent no.3 in his turn filed O.S.No.2072 of 2007 on the file of the II Additional Junior Civil Judge, Vijayawada seeking for the specific performance of the agreement of sale. It was a suit against R.1 and R.2. A compromise was entered into between R.1 to R.3 in O.S.No.2072 of 2007 in the year 2008 before the Lok Adalat Bench at Vijayawada. It infact is the impugned order in this writ petition. After settlement of the case before the Lok Adalat, respondents 1 and 2 sold part of the property to the respondent no.4. Learned counsel for the petitioners seeks for the setting aside the Lok Adalat award first, on the ground that it is fraudulent and secondly, on the ground that on the face of the Lok Adalat award, the writ petitioners would not be able to file a suit for declaration and other reliefs in respects of the property purchased by them. The litigation between the writ petitioners and the respondents 1 to 3 primarily and also respondent no.4 is primarily civil in nature. When respondents 1 to 3 entered into compromise before the Lok Adalat in respect of O.S.No.2072 of 2007, we are afraid that it cannot be called a fraudulent compromise. It would have been fraudulent had the petitioners been parties and compromise was entered into behind the back of the petitioners. The petitioners were not parties to O.S.No.2072 of 2007. Consequently we hold that the award of the Lok Adalat in L.A.No.557 of 2008 is not fraudulent. At the same time, the apprehension of the learned counsel for the petitioners is justified. The property over which the petitioners are claiming title and the property involved in L.A.No.557 of 2008 is totally one and the same or partly one and the same. The apprehension of the writ petitioners is that in the event the petitioners try to take recourse to civil action, the Civil Court may obstruct the petitioners from proceeding with the case on the ground that there is Lok Adalat award which has become final. Infact, the Lok Adalat award cannot prevent the petitioners from proceeding with the civil case as the petitioners are not parties to the Lok Adalat Award. At any rate we make it clear that the award in L.A.No.557 of 2008 in O.S.No.2072 of 2007 does not bind the petitioners in respect of the property covered by the award. The petitioners are at liberty to invoke due process of law for the redressal of their grievance. There was an interim order of status quo passed by this Court. The same shall remain in force for a period of four weeks so that the petitioners may move appropriate Court for proper redressal in the meanwhile. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of. No costs. ________________________ GHULAM MOHAMMED, J. ________________ K.G.SHANKER, J. 13-7-2011 KK Note : issue cc in one week THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED and THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.G. SHANKAR WRIT PETITION No.13495 of 2009 13-7-2011